The drone ban is only a political statement. Of course they don't intend to enforce anything. (Like the router ban.) The statement's made. Done deal...
Some of these do seem like a band-aid sometimes. I see the root cause as a municipality's inability, by law in places, to create their own network just like they do for things like water and sewage.
Utimately, the better solution would be to dismantle all the laws making municipal broadband illegal. (Not that that could ever happen either...) If the states did that, the ISPs would be forced to say, 'If we [don't want] to service these homes, the city will get fed up and do it themselves and we don't want people to be able to switch ISPs with a phone call.'.
Build it, don't build it. Your call, ISPs. But don't bitch when someone else takes it over and you become just another data stream/dumb pipe.
I wonder what would happen if a bunch of people agreed, got their money up front, and then didn't vote as expected. Could they then get sued? Interesting question... A lawsuit could be an admission of quilt by the payor. I could see a whole bunch of smart-asses [like myself], "Sure, give me the money", and then just keep it. What could they do?
They aren't going to investigate sh*t. Or at least, it isn't going to get anywhere. Rich people do as rich people do in 'Merica. With government backing, as usual.
Whatever state they end of in is going to need the tax dollars after federal aid cuts. So go already... As long as that state has the infrastructure you need, you're good.
I can't see how this ultimately wouldn't limit ICE more and be a benefit over any potencial harassment to unmasked protestors they may catch on camera. I think the public would come out on top, in the end. The propoganda machine is going to keep cranking out either way, regardless. I don't think it gives them much more to work with. (Particularly if you already think the Mitch McConnell picture may be a fake.)
Expired or not, they are going to keep on what they are doing. In regards to this particular issue, no administration has cared about the rule of law since 2001. It ain't just Trump.
I recently had a new furnace/AC installed with a smart thermostat. I'm not worried about surveillance but, I'm hesitant about creating an account and using those account based features because... What would stop the thermostat manufacturer from bricking the thermostat in the future? I bet Ring can brick their doorbells, if they ever wished to do so.
'people who provide an “economic benefit” or “national interest” could likely stay in the U.S. '[while being approved].
That's pretty much how it is now... H-1B and other exceptions to the 30 year plus wait. If you have proven economic benefit, you get in before you are 50.
If you are of color, there's always the Trump gold card. I somehow doubt to have to go back to your country of origin to apply for that, either.
"It doesn’t stop until the people responsible go to jail."
If that happened, why could I envision quite a few more Epstein-isk suicides? What is the acceptable failure rate on those cell cameras, again?
"and start directly jailing them instead."
That's a wonderful idea, except the only teeth the Judicial Branch had was the Executive Branch. When the criminals are the ones running the show, court orders don't mean squat.
Does anybody else see the irony in the fact that a publication that caters to Wall Street, is wondering why there are all these fees that are designed to cater to Wall Street?
When I read 'foreign head of state' I was thinking Putin. I've never honestly believed the meeting in Alaska had anything to do with Ukraine. Since the war/not war started in Iran, sanctions against Russia are gone. Not that they mattered much to begin with.
All Putin had to say to the orange russkie was, "Tell Israel you'll back their play and they'll start some shit real fast, and we can move our oil again."
"If it can be used for killing by our military, we want it." Inadvertant collaterial damage isn't a concern. And, if it's not useful to Trump [in his mind], he doesn't care if you are in business [at all], or not.
Just a politial statement
The drone ban is only a political statement. Of course they don't intend to enforce anything. (Like the router ban.) The statement's made. Done deal...
The better soution?
Some of these do seem like a band-aid sometimes. I see the root cause as a municipality's inability, by law in places, to create their own network just like they do for things like water and sewage. Utimately, the better solution would be to dismantle all the laws making municipal broadband illegal. (Not that that could ever happen either...) If the states did that, the ISPs would be forced to say, 'If we [don't want] to service these homes, the city will get fed up and do it themselves and we don't want people to be able to switch ISPs with a phone call.'. Build it, don't build it. Your call, ISPs. But don't bitch when someone else takes it over and you become just another data stream/dumb pipe.
Interesting thought...
I wonder what would happen if a bunch of people agreed, got their money up front, and then didn't vote as expected. Could they then get sued? Interesting question... A lawsuit could be an admission of quilt by the payor. I could see a whole bunch of smart-asses [like myself], "Sure, give me the money", and then just keep it. What could they do?
Not goinng to hold my breath...
They aren't going to investigate sh*t. Or at least, it isn't going to get anywhere. Rich people do as rich people do in 'Merica. With government backing, as usual.
I say go...
Whatever state they end of in is going to need the tax dollars after federal aid cuts. So go already... As long as that state has the infrastructure you need, you're good.
Better for us
I can't see how this ultimately wouldn't limit ICE more and be a benefit over any potencial harassment to unmasked protestors they may catch on camera. I think the public would come out on top, in the end. The propoganda machine is going to keep cranking out either way, regardless. I don't think it gives them much more to work with. (Particularly if you already think the Mitch McConnell picture may be a fake.)
NO difference...
Expired or not, they are going to keep on what they are doing. In regards to this particular issue, no administration has cared about the rule of law since 2001. It ain't just Trump.
Off topic, but about bricking...
I recently had a new furnace/AC installed with a smart thermostat. I'm not worried about surveillance but, I'm hesitant about creating an account and using those account based features because... What would stop the thermostat manufacturer from bricking the thermostat in the future? I bet Ring can brick their doorbells, if they ever wished to do so.
Still the norm
'people who provide an “economic benefit” or “national interest” could likely stay in the U.S. '[while being approved]. That's pretty much how it is now... H-1B and other exceptions to the 30 year plus wait. If you have proven economic benefit, you get in before you are 50. If you are of color, there's always the Trump gold card. I somehow doubt to have to go back to your country of origin to apply for that, either.
Deathwave
"It doesn’t stop until the people responsible go to jail." If that happened, why could I envision quite a few more Epstein-isk suicides? What is the acceptable failure rate on those cell cameras, again?
And who is going to do that?
"and start directly jailing them instead." That's a wonderful idea, except the only teeth the Judicial Branch had was the Executive Branch. When the criminals are the ones running the show, court orders don't mean squat.
Irony
Does anybody else see the irony in the fact that a publication that caters to Wall Street, is wondering why there are all these fees that are designed to cater to Wall Street?
Leonard French video
Leonard French recerntly posted a video on this very subject. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoT_dsC3ZX8
SAVE AMERICA
They already believe everything being said about the SAVE AMERICA Act is propoganda.
I was thinking Putin
When I read 'foreign head of state' I was thinking Putin. I've never honestly believed the meeting in Alaska had anything to do with Ukraine. Since the war/not war started in Iran, sanctions against Russia are gone. Not that they mattered much to begin with. All Putin had to say to the orange russkie was, "Tell Israel you'll back their play and they'll start some shit real fast, and we can move our oil again."
Thinking the same...
Ya, I was about to mention that myself. The US doesn't declare wars anymore. That's not a thing. It just does it.
"Ni"
Even noney...
I'd say it's even money that they don't even show up to testify. They're that ballsy. Or is the proper term arrogant? Hard to tell these days.
If it kills, we want it...
"If it can be used for killing by our military, we want it." Inadvertant collaterial damage isn't a concern. And, if it's not useful to Trump [in his mind], he doesn't care if you are in business [at all], or not.
They do...
They do know he's lying. They just don't want to deal with the 'presidential lawsuit' that would arise, if they called him on it.