text:
Thursday, July 26
The Classic Cocktail
What: Fine Spirits Classic
When: 6:30-9 p.m.
Where: Orchestra Hall in Minneapolis
Top mixologists around the country showcase their best at Minnesota Monthly's annual Fine Spirits Classic. General admission tickets to his 21-plus event includes more than 30 exhibitors' spirit, cocktail, beverage, and food selections. Upgrade to a VIP ticket for the same perks, complimentary valet, specialty cocktails, early admission, and more. Learn more.
Friday, July 27
Hard Rock, Harder to Miss
What: Def Leppard, Journey, and Cheap Trick
When: 7 p.m.
Where: Target Field in Minneapolis
Don't ever stop believing. This trio of musicians descends on Target Field to take you back in time, so you can relive your hard-to-glam rock glory days. This three-in-one performance (presented by Live Nation) gives concert-goers more than '70s-'80s nostalgia, though. It's also a chance to catch fiery, bombastic onstage chemistry among icons. Learn more.
Friday, July 27- Saturday, July 29
Running and Revelry
What: RoVival in Roseville
When: Various times across three days
Where: Rosedale Center in Roseville
Perfect for any runner, yogi, music lover, shopper, and tag-a-long puppy, the first annual RoVival comes with plenty of happenings: a timed 5K race, a one-mile "fun run" for you and your dog, sunset and morning yoga sessions, and a block party with music, food, and beer. Pick one or register for the entire event-packed weekend. Learn more.
Saturday, July 28
Land of 10,000 Beers
What: All Pints North
When: 3-7 p.m.
Where: Bayfront Festival Park in Duluth
"‹The Minnesota Craft Brewers Guild aims to preserve the history of the state's craft-brewing scene with annual brew fest All Pints North. On the shores of Lake Superior, dozens upon dozens of participating breweries serve unlimited two-ounce samples of their best brews. Live music, festival fare, and beer: the trifecta of a Minnesota summer. Learn more.
Saturday, July 28-Sunday, July 29
Art in the Park
What: Loring Park Art Festival
When: Saturday from 10 a.m.-6 p.m., Sunday from 10 a.m.-5 p.m.
Where: Loring Park at Oak Grove and Hennepin Avenue in Minneapolis
More than 25,000 art lovers—kids included—flood Loring Park to browse art in downtown Minneapolis. Stay busy at the craft booth and two food courts, with loads of food and beverage options, including Anchor Fish & Chips, Habanero Tacos, Hometown Creamery, and many more. With more than 140 artists and 10 live performances, there's culture and entertainment for all tastes. Learn more.


text:
Brain connections underlying accurate introspection revealed
- Date:
- October 16, 2013
- Source:
- University of California - Santa Barbara
- Summary:
- The human mind is not only capable of cognition and registering experiences but also of being introspectively aware of these processes. Until now, scientists have not known if such introspection was a single skill or dependent on the object of reflection. Also unclear was whether the brain housed a single system for reflecting on experience or required multiple systems to support different types of introspection.
- Share:
The human mind is not only capable of cognition and registering experiences but also of being introspectively aware of these processes. Until now, scientists have not known if such introspection was a single skill or dependent on the object of reflection. Also unclear was whether the brain housed a single system for reflecting on experience or required multiple systems to support different types of introspection.
A new study by UC Santa Barbara graduate student Benjamin Baird and colleagues suggest that the ability to accurately reflect on perceptual experience and the ability to accurately reflect on memories were uncorrelated, suggesting that they are distinct introspective skills. The findings appear in the Journal of Neuroscience.
The researchers used classic perceptual decision and memory retrieval tasks in tandem with functional magnetic resonance imaging to determine connectivity to regions in the front tip of the brain, commonly referred to as the anterior prefrontal cortex. The study tested a person's ability to reflect on his or her perception and memory and then examined how individual variation in each of these capacities was linked to the functional connections of the medial and lateral parts of the anterior prefrontal cortex.
"Our results suggest that metacognitive or introspective ability may not be a single thing," Baird said. "We actually find a behavioral dissociation between the two metacognitive abilities across people, which suggests that you can be good at reflecting on your memory but poor at reflecting on your perception, or vice versa."
The newly published research adds to the literature describing the role of the medial and lateral areas of the anterior prefrontal cortex in metacognition and suggests that specific subdivisions of this area may support specific types of introspection. The findings of Baird's team demonstrate that the ability to accurately reflect on perception is associated with enhanced connectivity between the lateral region of the anterior prefrontal cortex and the anterior cingulate, a region involved in coding uncertainty and errors of performance.
In contrast, the ability to accurately reflect on memory is linked to enhanced connectivity between the medial anterior prefrontal cortex and two areas of the brain: the precuneus and the lateral parietal cortex, regions prior work has shown to be involved in coding information pertaining to memories.
The experiment assessed the metacognitive abilities of 60 participants at the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Leipzig, Germany, where Baird was a visiting researcher. The perceptual decision task consisted of visual displays with six circles of vertical alternating light and dark bars -- called Gabor gratings -- arranged around a focal point. Participants were asked to identify whether the first or second display featured one of the six areas with a slight tilt, not always an easy determination to make.
A classic in psychology literature, the memory retrieval task consisted of two parts. First, participants were shown a list of 145 words. They were then shown a second set of words and asked to distinguish those they had seen previously. After each stimulus in both the perceptual decision and the memory retrieval task, participants rated their confidence in the accuracy of their responses on a scale of 1 (low confidence) to 6 (high confidence).
"Part of the novelty of this study is that it is the first to examine how connections between different regions of the brain support metacognitive processes," Baird said. "Also, prior means of computing metacognitive accuracy have been shown to be confounded by all kinds of things, like how well you do the primary task or your inherent bias toward high or low confidence.
"Using these precise measures, we're now beginning to drill down and see how different types of introspection are actually housed in the real human brain," Baird concluded. "So it's pretty fascinating from that perspective."
Story Source:
Materials provided by University of California - Santa Barbara. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.
Cite This Page:

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Welding equipment stores that sell online in Australia
Tokentools Welding Supplies is a Welding Equipment Company located in Wyong NSW and Supplies Welding Machines. Call 1300 881 991 or visit // We sell welding machines, service all types of welding equipments. We repair most Chinese based inverter machines. We are an Australian company based in Sydney Wyong NSW. Visit our online store where you can buy welding machines online. When you buy online welding equipments it helps keep costs low as the process is more efficient. Otherwise you can buy in store also.


text:
Our best-selling bottom for a reason! The Jennifer bottoms look amazing on just about everyone.
With zero elastic around the booty, they won't cut into your cheeks. Featuring a ruched detail in the back to create a flattering shape, these bottoms are so comfortable you won't want to take them off.
If you're having trouble finding the bikini bottom, look no further! These bottoms are our go-to when we're having trouble deciding what to wear.
- Single-lined in back, double-lined in front
- Cheeky boy-short cut
- Ruched booty
- Elastic-free rear bottom edge won't cut in
- Made in the USA of recycled fabrics
View more colors in this style.
Have no fear of finding the right fit! Returns and exchanges are easy peasy. View our policy here.
Our swimwear is designed by a professional kiteboarder with the intention that they stay put while you're shredding.


text:
This beautiful grandma cremation necklace opens to allow you to place a tiny amount of cremated ashes or hair inside.
The top of the pendant unscrews to reveal a small opening. It's easy to fill and we include tools to help you. Keep your loved ones always with you.
Made of premium stainless steel. Won't rust or tarnish.
You will love wearing it. Just see reviews from our happy customers.
What's included:
Cremation jewelry ships in 1-2 business days
Q. Can you engrave?
We cannot do any engraving. Most jewelry has room for engraving if you would like to find a local engraver.
Q. How do you fill it with ashes?
It is easy to fill. We include a small plastic funnel to help you fill the jewelry.
Q. Is it safe to order from here?
We value your security and ensure all payments are safe and secure. We have shipped to over 50,000 customers since 2016.
Q. When will my order ship?
All jewelry ships in 1-2 business days
Q. What is your return policy?
We want you to be happy with your order. If you're not 100% satifisfied, you can send unused jewelry to us within 60 days. Contact us at email@example.com.
Just enter your email below


text:
Driving/Travel Brief - NoJurisdiction.com - Freemen On The Land
Thanks go to www.tpuc.org and www.nojurisdiction.com for the following article:
This is one of the better ones I've read. Notice that "automobile" and "motor vehicle" appear to NOT mean the same thing:
NOW, comes the Accused, appearing specially and not generally or voluntarily, but under threat of arrest if he failed to do so, with this "BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE FOR DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION," stating as follows:
If ever a judge understood the public's right to use the public roads, it was Justice Tolman of the Supreme Court of the State of Washington. Justice Tolman stated:
"Complete freedom of the highways is so old and well established a blessing that we have forgotten the days of the Robber Barons and toll roads, and yet, under an act like this, arbitrarily administered, the highways may be completely monopolized, if, through lack of interest, the people submit, then they may look to see the most sacred of their liberties taken from them one by one, by more or less rapid encroachment." Robertson vs. Department of Public Works, 180 Wash 133, 147.
The words of Justice Tolman ring most prophetically in the ears of Citizens throughout the country today as the use of the public roads has been monopolized by the very entity which has been empowered to stand guard over our freedoms, i.e., that of state government.
The "most sacred of liberties" of which Justice Tolman spoke was personal liberty. The definition of personal liberty is:
"Personal liberty, or the Right to enjoyment of life and liberty, is one of the fundamental or natural Rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from, or dependent on, the U.S. Constitution, which may not be submitted to a vote and may not depend on the outcome of an election. It is one of the most sacred and valuable Rights, as sacred as the Right to private property...and is regarded as inalienable." 16 C.J.S., Constitutional Law, Sect.202, p.987.
This concept is further amplified by the definition of personal liberty:
"Personal liberty largely consists of the Right of locomotion -- to go where and when one pleases -- only so far restrained as the Rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but the common Right which he has under his Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Under this Constitutional guarantee one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another's Rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct." [emphasis added] II Am.Jur. (1st) Constitutional Law, Sect.329, p.1135.
and further...
"Personal liberty -- consists of the power of locomotion, of changing situations, of removing one's person to whatever place one's inclination may direct, without imprisonment or restraint unless by due process of law." 1 Blackstone's Commentary 134; Hare, Constitution__.777; Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., Black's Law Dictionary, 5th ed.
Justice Tolman was concerned about the State prohibiting the Citizen from the "most sacred of his liberties," the Right of movement, the Right of moving one's self from place to place without threat of imprisonment, the Right to use the public roads in the ordinary course of life.
When the State allows the formation of a corporation it may control its creation by establishing guidelines (statutes) for its operation (charters). Corporations who use the roads in the course of business do not use the roads in the ordinary course of life. There is a difference between a corporation and an individual. The United States Supreme Court has stated:
"...We are of the opinion that there is a clear distinction in this particular between an individual and a corporation, and that the latter has no right to refuse to submit its books and papers for examination on the suit of the State. The individual may stand upon his Constitutional Rights as a Citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to investigation, so far as it may tend to incriminate him. He owes no such duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life, liberty, and property. His Rights are such as the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the state, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his Rights are the refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under warrant of law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
"Upon the other hand, the corporation is a creature of the state. It is presumed to be incorporated for the benefit of the public. It receives certain special privileges and franchises, and holds them subject to the laws of the state and the limitations of its charter. Its rights to act as a corporation are only preserved to it so long as it obeys the laws of its creation. There is a reserved right in the legislature to investigate its contracts and find out whether it has exceeded its powers. It would be a strange anomaly to hold that the State, having chartered a corporation to make use of certain franchises, could not in exercise of its sovereignty inquire how those franchises had been employed, and whether they had been abused, and demand the production of corporate books and papers for that purpose." [emphasis added] Hale vs. Hinkel, 201 US 43, 74-75.
Corporations engaged in mercantile equity fall under the purview of the State's admiralty jurisdiction, and the public at large must be protected from their activities, as they (the corporations) are engaged in business for profit.
"...Based upon the fundamental ground that the sovereign state has the plenary control of the streets and highways in the exercise of its police power (see police power, infra.), may absolutely prohibit the use of the streets as a place for the prosecution of a private business for gain. They all recognize the fundamental distinction between the ordinary Right of the Citizen to use the streets in the usual way and the use of the streets as a place of business or a main instrumentality of business for private gain. The former is a common Right, the latter is an extraordinary use. As to the former the legislative power is confined to regulation, as to the latter it is plenary and extends even to absolute prohibition. Since the use of the streets by a common carrier in the prosecution of its business as such is not a right but a mere license of privilege." Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 657l, 168, p.516.
It will be necessary to review early cases and legal authority in order to reach a lawfully correct theory dealing with this Right or "privilege." We will attempt to reach a sound conclusion as to what is a "Right to use the road" and what is a "privilege to use the road". Once reaching this determination, we shall then apply those positions to modern case decision.
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.
"The claim and exercise of a constitutional Right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller vs. U.S., 230 F. 486, 489.
"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional Rights." Snerer vs. Cullen, 481 F. 946.
Streets and highways are established and maintained for the purpose of travel and transportation by the public. Such travel may be for business or pleasure.
"The use of the highways for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental Right of which the public and the individual cannot be rightfully deprived." [emphasis added] Chicago Motor Coach vs. Chicago, 169 NE 22; Ligare vs. Chicago, 28 NE 934; Boon vs. Clark, 214 SSW 607; 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways Sect.163.
"The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." [emphasis added] Thompson vs. Smith, 154 SE 579.
So we can see that a Citizen has a Right to travel upon the public highways by automobile and the Citizen cannot be rightfully deprived of his Liberty. So where does the misconception that the use of the public road is always and only a privilege come from?
"...For while a Citizen has the Right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that Right does not extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place for private gain. For the latter purpose no person has a vested right to use the highways of the state, but is a privilege or a license which the legislature may grant or withhold at its discretion." State vs. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; Hadfield, supra; Cummins vs. Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs. Banton, 44 S.Ct. 256; and other cases too numerous to mention.
Here the court held that a Citizen has the Right to travel upon the public highways, but that he did not have the right to conduct business upon the highways. On this point of law all authorities are unanimous.
"Heretofore the court has held, and we think correctly, that while a Citizen has the Right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that Right does not extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place of business for private gain." Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82; Willis vs. Buck, 263 P.l 982.
"The right of the citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, differs radically and obviously from that of one who makes the highway his place of business for private gain in the running of a stagecoach or omnibus." State vs. City of Spokane, 186 P. 864.
What is this Right of the Citizen which differs so "radically and obviously" from one who uses the highway as a place of business? Who better to enlighten us than Justice Tolman of the Supreme Court of Washington State? In State vs. City of Spokane, supra, the Court also noted a very "radical and obvious" difference, but went on to explain just what the difference is:
"The former is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a common right to all, while the latter is special, unusual, and extraordinary."
"This distinction, elementary and fundamental in character, is recognized by all the authorities." State vs. City of Spokane, supra.
This position does not hang precariously upon only a few cases, but has been proclaimed by an impressive array of cases ranging from the state courts to the federal courts.
"the right of the Citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business, differs radically and obviously from that of one who makes the highway his place of business and uses it for private gain in the running of a stagecoach or omnibus. The former is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a right common to all, while the latter is special, unusual, and extraordinary." Ex Parte Dickey, (Dickey vs. Davis), 85 SE 781.
"The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business." Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784; Thompson vs. Smith, supra.
There is no dissent among various authorities as to this position. (See Am.Jur. [1st] Const. Law, 329 and corresponding Am. Jur. [2nd].)
"Personal liberty -- or the right to enjoyment of life and liberty -- is one of the fundamental or natural rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from nor dependent on the U.S. Constitution... It is one of the most sacred and valuable rights [remember the words of Justice Tolman, supra.] as sacred as the right to private property...and is regarded as inalienable." 16 C.J.S. Const. Law, Sect.202, p.987.
As we can see, the distinction between a "Right" to use the public roads and a "privilege" to use the public roads is drawn upon the line of "using the road as a place of business" and the various state courts have held so. But what have the U.S. courts held on this point?
"First, it is well established law that the highways of the state are public property, and their primary and preferred use is for private purposes, and that their use for purposes of gain is special and extraordinary which, generally at least, the legislature may prohibit or condition as it sees fit." Stephenson vs. Rinford, 287 US 251; Pachard vs Banton, 264 US 140, and cases cited; Frost and F. Trucking Co. vs. Railroad Commission, 271 US 592; Railroad commission vs. Inter-City Forwarding Co., 57 SW.2d 290; Parlett Cooperative vs. Tidewater Lines, 164 A. 313.
So what is a privilege to use the roads? By now it should be apparent even to the "learned" that an attempt to use the road as a place of business is a privilege. The distinction must be drawn between...
1. Travelling upon and transporting one's property upon the public roads, which is our Right; and...
2. Using the public roads as a place of business or a main instrumentality of business, which is a privilege.
"[The roads]...are constructed and maintained at public expense, and no person therefore, can insist that he has, or may acquire, a vested right to their use in carrying on a commercial business." Ex Parte Sterling, 53 SW.2d 294; Barney vs. Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82; Stephenson vs. Binford, supra.
"When the public highways are made the place of business the state has a right to regulate their use in the interest of safety and convenience of the public as well as the preservation of the highways." Barney vs. Railroad Commissioners, supra.
"[The state's] right to regulate such use is based upon the nature of the business and the use of the highways in connection therewith." Ibid.
"We know of no inherent right in one to use the highways for commercial purposes. The highways are primarily for the use of the public, and in the interest of the public, the state may prohibit or regulate...the use of the highways for gain." Robertson vs. Dept. of Public Works, supra.
There should be considerable authority on a subject as important a this deprivation of the liberty of the individual "using the roads in the ordinary course of life and business." However, it should be noted that extensive research has not turned up one case or authority acknowledging the state's power to convert the individual's right to travel upon the public roads into a "privilege."
Therefore, it is concluded that the Citizen does have a "Right" to travel and transport his property upon the public highways and roads and the exercise of this Right is not a "privilege."
In order to understand the correct application of the statute in question, we must first define the terms used in connection with this point of law. As will be shown, many terms used today do not, in their legal context, mean what we assume they mean, thus resulting in the misapplication of statutes in the instant case.
There is a clear distinction between an automobile and a motor vehicle. An automobile has been defined as:
"The word `automobile' connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways." American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200.
While the distinction is made clear between the two as the courts have stated:
"A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received." International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120.
The term `motor vehicle' is different and broader than the word `automobile.'" City of Dayton vs. DeBrosse, 23 NE.2d 647, 650; 62 Ohio App. 232.
The distinction is made very clear in Title 18 USC 31: "Motor vehicle" means every description or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, or passengers and property.
"Used for commercial purposes" means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other considerations, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit.
Clearly, an automobile is private property in use for private purposes, while a motor vehicle is a machine which may be used upon the highways for trade, commerce, or hire.
The term "travel" is a significant term and is defined as:
"The term `travel' and `traveler' are usually construed in their broad and general sense...so as to include all those who rightfully use the highways viatically (when being reimbursed for expenses) and who have occasion to pass over them for the purpose of business, convenience, or pleasure." [emphasis added] 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways, Sect.427, p.717.
"Traveler -- One who passes from place to place, whether for pleasure, instruction, business, or health." Locket vs. State, 47 Ala. 45; Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., p. 3309.
"Travel -- To journey or to pass through or over; as a country district, road, etc. To go from one place to another, whether on foot, or horseback, or in any conveyance as a train, an automobile, carriage, ship, or aircraft; Make a journey." Century Dictionary, p.2034.
Therefore, the term "travel" or "traveler" refers to one who uses a conveyance to go from one place to another, and included all those who use the highways as a matter of Right.
Notice that in all these definitions the phrase "for hire" never occurs. This term "travel" or "traveler" implies, by definition, one who uses the road as a means to move from one place to another.
Therefore, one who uses the road in the ordinary course of life and business for the purpose of travel and transportation is a traveler.
The term "driver" in contradistinction to "traveler,": is defined as:
"Driver -- One employed in conducting a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle..." Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., p. 940.
Notice that this definition includes one who is "employed" in conducting a vehicle. It should be self-evident that this person could not be "travelling" on a journey, but is using the road as a place of business.
Today we assume that a "traveler" is a "driver," and a "driver" is an "operator." However, this is not the case.
"It will be observed from the language of the ordinance that a distinction is to be drawn between the terms `operator' and `driver'; the `operator' of the service car being the person who is licensed to have the car on the streets in the business of carrying passengers for hire; while the `driver' is the one who actually drives the car. However, in the actual prosecution of business, it was possible for the same person to be both `operator' and `driver.'" Newbill vs. Union Indemnity Co., 60 SE.2d 658.
To further clarify the definition of an "operator" the court observed that this was a vehicle "for hire" and that it was in the business of carrying passengers.
This definition would seem to describe a person who is using the road as a place of business, or in other words, a person engaged in the "privilege" of using the road for gain.
This definition, then, is a further clarification of the distinction mentioned earlier, and therefore:
1. Travelling upon and transporting one's property upon the public roads as a matter of Right meets the definition of a traveler.
2. Using the road as a place of business as a matter of privilege meets the definition of a driver or an operator or both.
Having defined the terms "automobile," "motor vehicle," "traveler," "driver," and "operator," the next term to define is "traffic":
"...Traffic thereon is to some extent destructive, therefore, the prevention of unnecessary duplication of auto transportation service will lengthen the life of the highways or reduce the cost of maintenance, the revenue derived by the state...will also tend toward the public welfare by producing at the expense of those operating for private gain, some small part of the cost of repairing the wear..." Northern Pacific R.R. Co. vs. Schoenfeldt, 213 P. 26.
Note: In the above, Justice Tolman expounded upon the key of raising revenue by taxing the "privilege" to use the public roads "at the expense of those operating for gain."
In this case, the word "traffic" is used in conjunction with the unnecessary Auto Transportation Service, or in other words, "vehicles for hire." The word "traffic" is another word which is to be strictly construed to the conducting of business.
"Traffic -- Commerce, trade, sale or exchange of merchandise, bills, money, or the like. The passing of goods and commodities from one person to another for an equivalent in goods or money..." Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., p. 3307.
Here again, notice that this definition refers to one "conducting business." No mention is made of one who is travelling in his automobile. This definition is of one who is engaged in the passing of a commodity or goods in exchange for money, i.e.., vehicles for hire.
Furthermore, the word "traffic" and "travel" must have different meanings which the courts recognize. The difference is recognized in Ex Parte Dickey, supra:
"...in addition to this, cabs, hackney coaches, omnibuses, taxicabs, and hacks, when unnecessarily numerous, interfere with the ordinary traffic and travel and obstruct them."
The court, by using both terms, signified its recognition of a distinction between the two. But, what was the distinction? We have already defined both terms, but to clear up any doubt:
"The word `traffic' is manifestly used here in secondary sense, and has reference to the business of transportation rather than to its primary meaning of interchange of commodities." Allen vs. City of Bellingham, 163 P. 18.
Here the Supreme Court of the State of Washington has defined the word "traffic" (in either its primary or secondary sense) in reference to business, and not to mere travel! So it is clear that the term "traffic" is business related and therefore, it is a "privilege." The net result being that "traffic" is brought under the (police) power of the legislature. The term has no application to one who is not using the roads as a place of business.
It seems only proper to define the word "license," as the definition of this word will be extremely important in understanding the statutes as they are properly applied:
"The permission, by competent authority to do an act which without permission, would be illegal, a trespass, or a tort." People vs. Henderson, 218 NW.2d 2, 4.
"Leave to do a thing which licensor could prevent." Western Electric Co. vs. Pacent Reproducer Corp., 42 F.2d 116, 118.
In order for these two definitions to apply in this case, the state would have to take up the position that the exercise of a Constitutional Right to use the public roads in the ordinary course of life and business is illegal, a trespass, or a tort, which the state could then regulate or prevent.
This position, however, would raise magnitudinous Constitutional questions as this position would be diametrically opposed to fundamental Constitutional Law. (See "Conversion of a Right to a Crime," infra.)
In the instant case, the proper definition of a "license" is:
"a permit, granted by an appropriate governmental body, generally for consideration, to a person, firm, or corporation, to pursue some occupation or to carry on some business which is subject to regulation under the police power." [emphasis added] Rosenblatt vs. California State Board of Pharmacy, 158 P.2d 199, 203.
This definition would fall more in line with the "privilege" of carrying on business on the streets.
Most people tend to think that "licensing" is imposed by the state for the purpose of raising revenue, yet there may well be more subtle reasons contemplated; for when one seeks permission from someone to do something he invokes the jurisdiction of the "licensor" which, in this case, is the state. In essence, the licensee may well be seeking to be regulated by the "licensor."
"A license fee is a charge made primarily for regulation, with the fee to cover costs and expenses of supervision or regulation." State vs. Jackson, 60 Wisc.2d 700; 211 NW.2d 480, 487.
The fee is the price; the regulation or control of the licensee is the real aim of the legislation.
Are these licenses really used to fund legitimate government, or are they nothing more than a subtle introduction of police power into every facet of our lives? Have our "enforcement agencies" been diverted from crime prevention, perhaps through no fault of their own, instead now busying themselves as they "check" our papers to see that all are properly endorsed by the state?
How much longer will it be before we are forced to get a license for our lawn mowers, or before our wives will need a license for her "blender" or "mixer?" They all have motors on them and the state can always use the revenue.
The confusion of the police power with the power of taxation usually arises in cases where the police power has affixed a penalty to a certain act, or where it requires licenses to be obtained and a certain sum be paid for certain occupations. The power used in the instant case cannot, however, be the power of taxation since an attempt to levy a tax upon a Right would be open to Constitutional objection. (See "taxing power," infra.)
Each law relating to the use of police power must ask three questions:
"1. Is there threatened danger?
2. Does a regulation involve a Constitutional Right?
3. Is this regulation reasonable?" People vs. Smith, 108 Am.St.Rep. 715; Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., under "Police Power."
When applying these three questions to the statute in question, some very important issues emerge.
First, "is there a threatened danger" in the individual using his automobile on the public highways, in the ordinary course of life and business?
The answer is No! There is nothing inherently dangerous in the use of an automobile when it is carefully managed. Their guidance, speed, and noise are subject to a quick and easy control, under a competent and considerate manager, it is as harmless on the road as a horse and buggy.
It is the manner of managing the automobile, and that alone, which threatens the safety of the public. The ability to stop quickly and to respond quickly to guidance would seem to make the automobile one of the least dangerous conveyances. (See Yale Law Journal, December, 1905.)
"The automobile is not inherently dangerous." Cohens vs. Meadow, 89 SE 876; Blair vs. Broadmore, 93 SE 532.
To deprive all persons of the Right to use the road in the ordinary course of life and business, because one might, in the future, become dangerous, would be a deprivation not only of the Right to travel, but also the Right to due process. (See "Due Process," infra.)
Next, does the regulation involve a Constitutional Right?
This question has already been addressed and answered in this brief, and need not be reinforced other than to remind this Court that this Citizen does have the Right to travel upon the public highway by automobile in the ordinary course of life and business. It can therefore be concluded that this regulation does involve a Constitutional Right.
The third question is the most important in this case. "Is this regulation reasonable?"
The answer is No! It will be shown later in "Regulation," infra., that this licensing statute is oppressive and could be effectively administered by less oppressive means.
Although the Fourteenth Amendment does not interfere with the proper exercise of the police power, in accordance with the general principle that the power must be exercised so as not to invade unreasonably the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution, it is established beyond question that every state power, including the police power, is limited by the Fourteenth Amendment (and others) and by the inhibitions there imposed.
Moreover, the ultimate test of the propriety of police power regulations must be found in the Fourteenth Amendment, since it operates to limit the field of the police power to the extent of preventing the enforcement of statutes in denial of Rights that the Amendment protects. (See Parks vs. State, 64 NE 682.)
"With regard particularly to the U.S. Constitution, it is elementary that a Right secured or protected by that document cannot be overthrown or impaired by any state police authority." Connolly vs. Union Sewer Pipe Co., 184 US 540; Lafarier vs. Grand Trunk R.R. Co., 24 A. 848; O'Neil vs. Providence Amusement Co., 108 A. 887.
"The police power of the state must be exercised in subordination to the provisions of the U.S. Constitution." [emphasis added] Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Co. vs. State Highway Commission, 294 US 613; Bacahanan vs. Wanley, 245 US 60.
"It is well settled that the Constitutional Rights protected from invasion by the police power, include Rights safeguarded both by express and implied prohibitions in the Constitutions." Tiche vs. Osborne, 131 A. 60.
"As a rule, fundamental limitations of regulations under the police power are found in the spirit of the Constitutions, not in the letter, although they are just as efficient as if expressed in the clearest language." Mehlos vs. Milwaukee, 146 NW 882.
As it applies in the instant case, the language of the Fifth Amendment is clear:
No person shall be...deprived of Life, Liberty, or Property without due process of law.
As has been shown, the courts at all levels have firmly established an absolute Right to travel.
In the instant case, the state, by applying commercial statutes to all entities, natural and artificial persons alike, has deprived this free and natural person of the Right of Liberty, without cause and without due process of law.
"The essential elements of due process of law are...Notice and The Opportunity to defend." Simon vs. Craft, 182 US 427.
Yet, not one individual has been given notice of the loss of his/her Right, let alone before signing the license (contract). Nor was the Citizen given any opportunity to defend against the loss of his/her right to travel, by automobile, on the highways, in the ordinary course of life and business. This amounts to an arbitrary deprivation of Liberty.
"There should be no arbitrary deprivation of Life or Liberty..." Barbour vs. Connolly, 113 US 27, 31; Yick Wo vs. Hopkins, 118 US 356.
"The right to travel is part of the Liberty of which a citizen cannot deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. This Right was emerging as early as the Magna Carta." Kent vs. Dulles, 357 US 116 (1958).
The focal point of this question of police power and due process must balance upon the point of making the public highways a safe place for the public to travel. If a man travels in a manner that creates actual damage, an action would lie (civilly) for recovery of damages. The state could then also proceed against the individual to deprive him of his Right to use the public highways, for cause. This process would fulfill the due process requirements of the Fifth Amendment while at the same time insuring that Rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and the state constitutions would be protected.
But unless or until harm or damage (a crime) is committed, there is no cause for interference in the private affairs or actions of a Citizen.
One of the most famous and perhaps the most quoted definitions of due process of law, is that of Daniel Webster in his Dartmouth College Case (4 Wheat 518), in which he declared that by due process is meant "a law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry, and renders judgment only after trial." (See also State vs. Strasburg, 110 P. 1020; Dennis vs. Moses, 52 P. 333.)
Somewhat similar is the statement that is a rule as old as the law that "no one shall be personally bound (restricted) until he has had his day in court," by which is meant, until he has been duly cited to appear and has been afforded an opportunity to be heard. Judgment without such citation and opportunity lacks all the attributes of a judicial determination; it is judicial usurpation and it is oppressive and can never be upheld where it is fairly administered. (12 Am.Jur. [1st] Const. Law, Sect.573, p.269.)
Note: This sounds like the process used to deprive one of the "privilege" of operating a motor vehicle "for hire." It should be kept in mind, however, that we are discussing the arbitrary deprivation of the Right to use the road that all citizens have "in common."
The futility of the state's position can be most easily observed in the 1959 Washington Attorney General's opinion on a similar issue:
"The distinction between the Right of the Citizen to use the public highways for private, rather than commercial purposes is recognized..."
"Under its power to regulate private uses of our highways, our legislature has required that motor vehicle operators be licensed (I.C. 49-307). Undoubtedly, the primary purpose of this requirement is to insure, as far as possible, that all motor vehicle operators will be competent and qualified, thereby reducing the potential hazard or risk of harm, to which other users of the highways might otherwise be subject. But once having complied with this regulatory provision, by obtaining the required license, a motorist enjoys the privilege of travelling freely upon the highways..." Washington A.G.O. 59-60 No. 88, p. 11.
This alarming opinion appears to be saying that every person using an automobile as a matter of Right, must give up the Right and convert the Right into a privilege. This is accomplished under the guise of regulation. This statement is indicative of the insensitivity, even the ignorance, of the government to the limits placed upon governments by and through the several constitutions.
This legal theory may have been able to stand in 1959; however, as of 1966, in the United States Supreme Court decision in Miranda, even this weak defense of the state's actions must fall.
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.
Thus the legislature does not have the power to abrogate the Citizen's Right to travel upon the public roads, by passing legislation forcing the citizen to waive his Right and convert that Right into a privilege. Furthermore, we have previously established that this "privilege" has been defined as applying only to those who are "conducting business in the streets" or "operating for-hire vehicles."
The legislature has attempted, by legislative fiat, to deprive the Citizen of his Right to use the roads in the ordinary course of life and business, without affording the Citizen the safeguard of "due process of law." This has been accomplished under supposed powers of regulation.
"In addition to the requirement that regulations governing the use of the highways must not be violative of constitutional guarantees, the prime essentials of such regulation are reasonableness, impartiality, and definiteness or certainty." 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways, Sect.260.
"Moreover, a distinction must be observed between the regulation of an activity which may be engaged in as a matter of right and one carried on by government sufferance of permission." Davis vs. Massachusetts, 167 US 43; Pachard vs. Banton, supra.
One can say for certain that these regulations are impartial since they are being applied to all, even though they are clearly beyond the limits of the legislative powers. However, we must consider whether such regulations are reasonable and non-violative of constitutional guarantees.
First, let us consider the reasonableness of this statute requiring all persons to be licensed (presuming that we are applying this statute to all persons using the public roads). In determining the reasonableness of the statute we need only ask two questions:
1. Does the statute accomplish its stated goal?
The answer is No!
The attempted explanation for this regulation "to insure the safety of the public by insuring, as much as possible, that all are competent and qualified."
However, one can keep his license without retesting, from the time he/she is first licensed until the day he/she dies, without regard to the competency of the person, by merely renewing said license before it expires. It is therefore possible to completely skirt the goal of this attempted regulation, thus proving that this regulation does not accomplish its goal.
Furthermore, by testing and licensing, the state gives the appearance of underwriting the competence of the licensees, and could therefore be held liable for failures, accidents, etc. caused by licensees.
2. Is the statute reasonable?
The answer is No!
This statute cannot be determined to be reasonable since it requires to the Citizen to give up his or her natural Right to travel unrestricted in order to accept the privilege. The purported goal of this statute could be met by much less oppressive regulations, i.e., competency tests and certificates of competency before using an automobile upon the public roads. (This is exactly the situation in the aviation sector.)
But isn't this what we have now?
The answer is No! The real purpose of this license is much more insidious. When one signs the license, he/she gives up his/her Constitutional Right to travel in order to accept and exercise a privilege. After signing the license, a quasi-contract, the Citizen has to give the state his/her consent to be prosecuted for constructive crimes and quasi-criminal actions where there is no harm done and no damaged property.
These prosecutions take place without affording the Citizen of their Constitutional Rights and guarantees such a the Right to a trial by jury of twelve persons and the Right to counsel, as well as the normal safeguards such as proof of intent and a corpus dilecti and a grand jury indictment. These unconstitutional prosecutions take place because the Citizen is exercising a privilege and has given his/her "implied consent" to legislative enactments designed to control interstate commerce, a regulatable enterprise under the police power of the state.
We must now conclude that the Citizen is forced to give up Constitutional guarantees of "Right" in order to exercise his state "privilege" to travel upon the public highways in the ordinary course of life and business.
A Citizen cannot be forced to give up his/her Rights in the name of regulation.
"...the only limitations found restricting the right of the state to condition the use of the public highways as a means of vehicular transportation for compensation are (1) that the state must not exact of those it permits to use the highways for hauling for gain that they surrender any of their inherent U.S. Constitutional Rights as a condition precedent to obtaining permission for such use..." [emphasis added] Riley vs. Laeson, 142 So. 619; Stephenson vs. Binford, supra.
If one cannot be placed in a position of being forced to surrender Rights in order to exercise a privilege, how much more must this maxim of law, then, apply when one is simply exercising (putting into use) a Right?
"To be that statute which would deprive a Citizen of the rights of person or property, without a regular trial, according to the course and usage of the common law, would not be the law of the land." Hoke vs. Henderson, 15 NC 15.
"We find it intolerable that one Constitutional Right should have to be surrendered in order to assert another." Simons vs. United States, 390 US 389.
Since the state requires that one give up Rights in order to exercise the privilege of driving, the regulation cannot stand under the police power, due process, or regulation, but must be exposed as a statute which is oppressive and one which has been misapplied to deprive the Citizen of Rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the state constitutions.
"Any claim that this statute is a taxing statute would be immediately open to severe Constitutional objections. If it could be said that the state had the power to tax a Right, this would enable the state to destroy Rights guaranteed by the constitution through the use of oppressive taxation. The question herein, is one of the state taxing the Right to travel by the ordinary modes of the day, and whether this is a legislative object of the state taxation.
The views advanced herein are neither novel nor unsupported by authority. The question of taxing power of the states has been repeatedly considered by the Supreme Court. The Right of the state to impede or embarrass the Constitutional operation of the U.S. Government or the Rights which the Citizen holds under it, has been uniformly denied." McCulloch vs. Maryland, 4 Wheat 316.
The power to tax is the power to destroy, and if the state is given the power to destroy Rights through taxation, the framers of the Constitution wrote that document in vain.
"...It may be said that a tax of one dollar for passing through the state cannot sensibly affect any function of government or deprive a Citizen of any valuable Right. But if a state can tax...a passenger of one dollar, it can tax him a thousand dollars." Crandall vs. Nevada, 6 Wall 35, 46.
"If the Right of passing through a state by a Citizen of the United States is one guaranteed by the Constitution, it must be sacred from state taxation." Ibid., p.47.
Therefore, the Right of travel must be kept sacred from all forms of state taxation and if this argument is used by the state as a defense of the enforcement of this statute, then this argument also must fail.
As previously demonstrated, the Citizen has the Right to travel and to transport his property upon the public highways in the ordinary course of life and business. However, if one exercises this Right to travel (without first giving up the Right and converting that Right into a privilege) the Citizen is by statute, guilty of a crime. This amounts to converting the exercise of a Constitutional Right into a crime.
Recall the Miller vs. U.S. and Snerer vs. Cullen quotes from p.5, and,
"The state cannot diminish Rights of the people." Hurtado vs. California, 110 US 516.
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda, supra.
Indeed, the very purpose for creating the state under the limitations of the constitution was to protect the rights of the people from intrusion, particularly by the forces of government.
So we can see that any attempt by the legislature to make the act of using the public highways as a matter of Right into a crime, is void upon its face.
Any person who claims his Right to travel upon the highways, and so exercises that Right, cannot be tried for a crime of doing so. And yet, this Freeman stands before this court today to answer charges for the "crime" of exercising his Right to Liberty.
As we have already shown, the term "drive" can only apply to those who are employed in the business of transportation for hire. It has been shown that freedom includes the Citnzen's Right to use the public highways in the ordinary course of life and business without license or regulation by the police powers of the state.
It is the duty of the court to recognize the substance of things and not the mere form.
"The courts are not bound by mere form, nor are they to be misled by mere pretenses. They are at liberty -- indeed they are under a solemn duty -- to look at the substance of things, whenever they enter upon the inquiry whether the legislature has transcended the limits of its authority. If, therefore, a statute purported to have been enacted to protect...the public safety, has no real or substantial relation to those objects or is a palpable invasion of Rights secured by the fundamental law, it is the duty of the courts to so adjudge, and thereby give effect to the Constitution." Mulger vs. Kansas, 123 US 623, 661.
"It is the duty of the courts to be watchful for the Constitutional rights of the citizen and against any stealthy encroachments thereon." Boyd vs. United States, 116 US 616.
The courts are "duty bound" to recognize and stop the "stealthy encroachments" which have been made upon the Citizen's Right to travel and to use the roads to transport his property in the "ordinary course of life and business." (Hadfield, supra.)
Further, the court must recognize that the Right to travel is part of the Liberty of which a Citizen cannot be deprived without specific cause and without the "due process of law" guaranteed in the Fifth Amendment. (Kent, supra.)
The history of this "invasion" of the Citizen's Right to use the public highways shows clearly that the legislature simply found a heretofore untapped source of revenue, got greedy, and attempted to enforce a statute in an unconstitutional manner upon those free and natural individuals who have a Right to travel upon the highways. This was not attempted in an outright action, but in a slow, meticulous, calculated encroachment upon the Citizen's Right to travel.
This position must be accepted unless the prosecutor can show his authority for the position that the "use of the road in the ordinary course of life and business" is a privilege.
To rule in any other manner, without clear authority for an adverse ruling, will infringe upon fundamental and basic concepts of Constitutional law. This position, that a Right cannot be regulated under any guise, must be accepted without concern for the monetary loss of the state.
"Disobedience or evasion of a Constitutional Mandate cannot be tolerated, even though such disobedience may, at least temporarily, promote in some respects the best interests of the public." Slote vs. Examination, 112 ALR 660.
"Economic necessity cannot justify a disregard of Constitutional guarantee." Riley vs. Carter, 79 ALR 1018; 16 Am.Jur. (2nd), Const. Law, Sect.81.
"Constitutional Rights cannot be denied simply because of hostility to their assertions and exercise; vindication of conceded Constitutional Rights cannot be made dependent upon any theory that it is less expensive to deny them than to afford them." Watson vs. Memphis, 375 US 526.
Therefore, the Court's decision in the instant case must be made without the issue of cost to the state being taken into consideration, as that issue is irrelevant. The state cannot lose money that it never had a right to demand from the "Sovereign People."
Finally, we come to the issue of "public policy." It could be argued that the "licensing scheme" of all persons is a matter of "public policy." However, if this argument is used, it too must fail, as:
"No public policy of a state can be allowed to override the positive guarantees of the U.S. Constitution." 16 Am.Jur. (2nd), Const. Law, Sect.70.
So even "public policy" cannot abrogate this Citizen's Right to travel and to use the public highways in the ordinary course of life and business.
Therefore, it must be concluded that:
"We have repeatedly held that the legislature may regulate the use of the highways for carrying on business for private gain and that such regulation is a valid exercise of the police power." Northern Pacific R.R. Co., supra.
"The act in question is a valid regulation, and as such is binding upon all who use the highway for the purpose of private gain." Ibid.
Any other construction of this statute would render it unconstitutional as applied to this Citizen or any Citizen. The Accused therefore moves this court to dismiss the charge against him, with prejudice.
In addition:
Since no notice is given to people applying for driver's (or other) licenses that they have a perfect right to use the roads without any permission, and that they surrender valuable rights by taking on the regulation system of licensure, the state has committed a massive construction fraud. This occurs when any person is told that they must have a license in order to use the public roads and highways.
The license, being a legal contract under which the state is empowered with policing powers is only valid when the licensee takes on the burdens of the contract and bargains away his or her rights knowingly, intentionally, and voluntarily.
Few know that the driver's license is a contract without which the police are powerless to regulate the people's actions or activities.
Few if any licensees intentionally surrender valuable rights. They are told that they must have the license. As we have seen, this is not the case.
No one in their right mind voluntarily surrenders complete liberty and accepts in its place a set of regulations.
"The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion." Edmund Burke, 1784.


text:
PatchReader(3) | User Contributed Perl Documentation | PatchReader(3) |
PatchReader - Utilities to read and manipulate patches and CVS
# Script that reads in a patch (in any known format), and prints # out some information about it. Other common operations are # outputting the patch in a raw unified diff format, outputting # the patch information to Template::Toolkit templates, adding # context to a patch from CVS, and narrowing the patch down to # apply only to a single file or set of files. use PatchReader::Raw; use PatchReader::PatchInfoGrabber; my $filename = 'filename.patch'; # Create the reader that parses the patch and the object that # extracts info from the reader's datastream my $reader = new PatchReader::Raw(); my $patch_info_grabber = new PatchReader::PatchInfoGrabber(); $reader->sends_data_to($patch_info_grabber); # Iterate over the file $reader->iterate_file($filename); # Print the output my $patch_info = $patch_info_grabber->patch_info(); print "Summary of Changed Files:\n"; while (my ($file, $info) = each %{$patch_info->{files}}) { print "$file: +$info->{plus_lines} -$info->{minus_lines}\n"; }
This perl library allows you to manipulate patches programmatically by chaining together a variety of objects that read, manipulate, and output patch information:
- PatchReader::Raw
- Parse a patch in any format known to this author (unified, normal, cvs diff, among others)
- PatchReader::PatchInfoGrabber
- Grab summary info for sections of a patch in a nice hash
- PatchReader::AddCVSContext
- Add context to the patch by grabbing the original files from CVS
- PatchReader::NarrowPatch
- Narrow a patch down to only apply to a specific set of files
- PatchReader::DiffPrinter::raw
- Output the parsed patch in raw unified diff format
- PatchReader::DiffPrinter::template
- Output the parsed patch to Template::Toolkit templates (can be used to make HTML output or anything else you please)
Additionally, it is designed so that you can plug in your own objects that read the parsed data while it is being parsed (no need for the performance or memory problems that can come from reading in the entire patch all at once). You can do this by mimicking one of the existing readers (such as PatchInfoGrabber) and overriding the methods start_patch, start_file, section, end_file and end_patch.
2024-07-13 | perl v5.38.2 |


text:
YENNIFER Harness Set
Intricate cage lingerie made of deep purple elastic with satin finish. The set consists of the top harness, garter belt with stocking holders and a chocker with sparkling star and pentagram charms.
Please allow up to 30-33 days for the item to be created and shipped out. If you need your order by a certain date, please specify it into the note to the order.
Please use the size chart on the picture to choose your size.
If you need a bigger size than 2XL, please provide your measurements in the note to the order.
If you have any questions, would like to make any customization or need additional pictures, please feel free to send us a message 🐾
Please kindly note that all customized items, even only by size, and also all lingerie and harnesses can't be returned or exchanged unless arrived damaged or defective. Therefore, if you have any doubts about the size you need, please contact us. We will be glad to help you!
Please also consider that the color rending may depend on your device's screen settings.
Estimated shipping time by standard mail with tracking number:
Europe: 3-4 weeks
USA: 4-5 weeks
Canada: 4-5 weeks
Australia: 5-6 weeks
Express delivery is available as well. Please contact us to clarify its estimated time.


text:
Azure Farm Classic 3-Bean Chili Mix
Regular price
Azure Farm Classic 3-Bean Chili Mix
Add your own ground meat or meat substitute to make authentic chili, or add tomato sauce and enjoy it as chili soup.
INGREDIENTS: Organic Pinto Beans, Organic Pink Beans, Organic Small Red Beans, Organic Onion, Organic Chili Pepper, Organic RealSalt, Organic Spices, Organic Garlic, Organic Red Pepper.
Nutrition Facts
Serving Size: 1/4 cup dry (49 g)
Servings Per Container: About 17 (30.5 oz size)
Servings Per Container: About 8 (13.6 oz size)
Nutrient Amount % DV
Calories 170
Calories from Fat 5
Total Fat 0.5 g 1%
Sodium 230 mg 10%
Total Carbohydrate 31 g 10%
Dietary Fiber 9 g 34%
Sugars 3 g
Protein 10 g
Vitamin A 4%
Vitamin C 6%
Calcium 6%
Iron 15%
Not a significant source of saturated fat, trans fat, and cholesterol.
- Cooking Instructions for 30.5 oz. package: Sort and wash beans. Add bean blend to 10 cups water, bring to a gentle boil for 30 minutes. Add seasoning packet, 2-15 oz. cans of organic tomato sauce, and cook an additional 20 to 30 minutes. Serves 17.
- Cooking Instructions for 13.6 oz. package: Sort and wash beans. Add bean blend to 6 cups water, bring to a gentle boil for 30 minutes. Add seasoning packet, 2-8 oz. cans of organic tomato sauce and cook an additional 20 to 30 minutes. Serves 8.
- Azure Farm is located in the foothills east of Mt. Hood with a fantastic view of the Cascades and farm land in the valleys below. This is wheat growing country where dry-land farming produces an abundance of soft white wheat and other grains. But what makes our farm different from most other wheat farms is our growing practices. We've been growing organically for over 25 years, and are attempting to go beyond basic "organic" (which only ensures which harmful things have not been used). We try to keep up with organic soil amendments that will actually improve our soil, and consequently improve the food itself.
- Any items with the Azure Farm label which are not grown on Azure Farm, are from farms which we know have been growing organically for many years, doing whatever they can to ensure healthy soil, so the food on your table is also healthy.
- Why go organic? Organic foods are grown without synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides. Organic foods are not genetically modified. Organic foods are grown in soil that is nurtured, not treated... which means top soil, groundwater, rivers, lakes, streams, watersheds, fish & wildlife, and people are not compromised. Healthy food grows in healthy soil. You can often taste the organic difference!


text:
CNC Router Masuter Pro with Hybrid Table Bundle Kit
SKU: BD-MasuterPro-HybridTable |
Structure Upgrade: Masuter Pro is an All-Aluminum CNC router, which makes the machine sturdier than the last version. The Z-axis uses linear rails instead of the optical axis, this greatly improves the stability and accuracy.
Upgraded Controller Box: The control board is upgraded to a compact controller box. The emergency stop button and home button are more easily and more convenient to access. The control box is also dust-proof for easy maintenance.
Compatibility Upgrade: Masuter Pro includes 2 spindle clamps: 52mm & 65mm. The 52mm clamp can accommodate the 60W spindle, 300W spindle and the FoxAlien laser modules. The 65mm clamp is for customized upgrade, such as 65mm Makita router, 1.5KW spindle, etc. Masuter Pro also supports the 69mm spindle clamp, please buy separately.
Assembly Upgrade: Main parts are pre-assembled, and the part of the wires are pre-installed to the controller box. It takes only 10-15 minutes to fully assemble.
Additional Working Light: A small working light is added to the Z-axis. It helps you to monitor the carving details and process more clearly. Each stepper motor has a knob for easy adjusting by hand.
- Active Working Area: 15.75" x 15.75" x 2.36" (400 x 400 x 60mm)
- Spindle: 775; 10000RPM
- Input Supply: 12V/5A
- Stepper Motor: 1.3 A, 12V, 0.25 Nm torque (2.2 in lb)
- Supported OS: Windows XP/7/8/10/11, MAC OS, Linux
Package List
- 1x Masuter Pro CNC Router Machine (Main part pre-installed)
- 1x Z Probe
- 1x Controller Box
- 4x Hold-down Clamp
- 1x 52mm Spindle Clamp
- 1x 65mm Spindle Clamp
- 1x Power Supply
- 1x USB Cable
- 1x U Disk
- 1x User Manual
- 10 x Router Bits
- Packs of screws


text:
Use Mercurial with Redmine
Redmine only works with Mercurial repositories cloned in your local machine, as explained in the official guide.
Install the Mercurial package:
$ sudo apt-get install mercurial
Restart services:
$ sudo /opt/bitnami/ctlscript.sh restart
Create the repository directory, clone it and give it the proper permissions:
$ cd $HOME $ mkdir mercurialRepo $ cd mercurialRepo $ sudo hg clone REPO_URL
Add your repository to Redmine by navigating in your project to the "Settings -> Repositories -> New repository" menu. Replace the ID placeholder with a short identifier for the repository, the USER placeholder with the username, and the REPO placeholder with the correct directory name for the cloned repository.
SCM: Mercurial Identifier: ID Path to repository: /home/USER/mercurialRepo/REPO
Check the repository and confirm that you can view the files, commits, comments and so on.


text:
It's here. Release Day for Draw Me to Your Side, Book Four in my Revolutionary Faith series. I received my box of books, and I am finally able to hold the novel in my hands. So excited!
I am giving away a print copy to one lucky winner. Comment on this blog for your chance to win. I'll draw a name on Wednesday, February 26! Good luck!
You can purchase your copy from Amazon or a signed copy from me at (firstname.lastname@example.com.)
Also, you can still purchase the eBook for $.99 from this link
Leave comments about anything–the cover, the series, the weather….


text:
- Free Shipping over £45
- 30 Days Returns
- Low stock - 2 items left
- Inventory on the way
This wooden panther figure is chunky and easy for little hands to hold and is perfect for small world play, stacking and different learning activities. Great addition to any toys collection. Painted on both sides while still showing the beautiful grain of the wood on the edge.
Made from sustainably sourced rubber wood and painted with non-toxic paints.
Size: 6.5 cm (H) x 12.5 cm (W) x 2.5 cm (D)
Recommended age 1-5 years
Age suitability: 10 months +
WARNING! Not suitable for children under 10 months, due to size and shape of pieces.
Cleaning instructions:
Wipe clean only with a damp cloth
Wipe away any excess moisture and leave to air dry (avoid direct sunlight)
This figure is also compatible with Lanka Kade Deluxe Noah's arks, Farmers Field, Pig and Sheep Barn and Deluxe Farm playsets.
About Lanka Kade:
Lanka Kade produces a wide range of Fair trade educational toys and gifts for children. Their high quality and distinctive design makes them firm favourites among many families and educators in the UK and around the world.
Lanka Kade toys are produced in Sri Lanka by skilled artisans and following the best fair trade practises, using sustainably sourced rubber wood and non-toxic paints.
Free Standard shipping on all UK orders over £45.
Standard shipping for orders under £45
£2.95 | 2-4 days after dispatch
First class shipping for orders under £45
£5.50 | 1-2 days after dispatch
First class shipping for orders over £45
£2.50 | 1-2 days after dispatch
International shipping
Unfortunately we cannot offer international shipping at the moment.
Important Information
If your item is in stock, we will dispatch your order in 1-2 business days. Please allow 3 days in busy periods. (Monday to Friday)
We use Royal Mail for most of our parcels. If your parcels is over 2 kg then it would be send by courier service.
For urgent orders, we will do our best to dispatch on the day of purchase, please call us on 07729743550 or email email@example.com
Our policy lasts 30 days. If 30 days have gone by since your purchase, unfortunately we can't offer you a refund or exchange.
To be eligible for a return, your item must be unused and in the same condition that you received it. It must also be in the original packaging.


text:
You can consider my Del.icio.us links an extension to my blog, as are my LifeTango goals and my other to-do items. My to-buy list is also public, but only for sharing any useful ideas that might be there; I'm not requesting charity, neither do I offer it.
You can find me easily in google searches, as jcomeau, jcomeau_ictx, or jcomeauictx. There are lots of other jcomeaus, but AFAIK I'm the only jcomeau_ictx out there so far.
If you want to comment on anything you see here, try the new Facebook comments, reachable by clicking the "[comment]" link at the end of each post. If for some reason that isn't working, go ahead and email me, jc.unternet.net. You know what to do with the first dot. Make the 'subject' line something reasonably intelligent-looking or it goes plunk! into the spambasket unread.
This RSS feed may or may not work. Haven't fiddled with it in forever.
Apparently those large-leaved plants I found growing in the washes and along the streets of Baja California are a wild tobacco, Nicotiana glauca. "Ingestion of the leaves can be fatal"... glad I didn't continue my edibility testing! [comment]
My right-foot Chaco catastrophically failed today, having worn completely through the sole, and abrasion cutting the strap in two. I was extremely fortunate that this process did not complete yesterday during my trek back to Two Day Town from downtown Livermore. [comment]
On my walk yesterday I ate a couple of nuts I thought were almonds but had the cyanide bittersweetness of peach pits. Could peaches be growing in the east bay? The fruits were furry. [comment]
Two Day Town would be so much better without the checkered asshat droning on before and after every act. Regardless, groove.org was fuckin' awesome. [comment]
Seriously dehydrated, I drank a few gulps from the lake, risking coliform bacteria, giardia, and other nasties. A few miles later I gulped down a quart from a water fointain. I believe I hear music from Two Day Town. I hope so, there probably isn't more than a half hour of daylight left. [comment]
Decided to go back to the lake by way of south L street/Arroyo Road. Just past the VA hospital there was a park with a public restroom. Just in time. [comment]
One thing I noticed at Union Station the other day was the acoustics in the long corridor, from where the train platforms branch off: horrible. With some practice, I could pick out the "May I have your attention please", but anything beyond that was lost in a cacophony of echos, reverberations, and clipping. Either no sound engineer was consulted or they just don't care. [comment]
Forgot to mention that while I was waiting for the Megabus, I finally endured the pain to break off that chunk of my split tooth that had been bugging me, and threw it in the trash. Once the gum heals and toughens up, I'll hopefully be able to use what's left of that tooth. I'd been avoiding it for a few months while that loose piece was flapping back and forth and causing pain.
And then I met a guy Douglas who had a hand in creating a 3-level accordion bus that has been to Burning Man. He walked with me a while last night after the bus let us out, but at some point he wandered off in a different direction and I continued to the Embarcadero. [comment]
The Megabus arrived in SF before 0200. Walked around all night and reached the Golden Gate bridge just after the number 80 bus passed. In another half hour I was on the 101, nodding out between each stop so it seemed instantaneous travel between towns. At the Petaluma downtown Starbucks for the last hour or so, about to head over to see a certain lady. [comment]
So it seems Sam Woo never closed after all! But their prices are up. Stopped at Mayflower first but they asked to see cash first and that reminded me of how rude they've always been. Anyway, after going to an ATM I found Sam and got the brisket with special sauce and a bowl of rice.
Union Station and surroundings are changing! Starbucks and Ben & Jerry's now inside. It's the age-old process of gentrification once those at the top of the local power structure have bought up all the key pieces of real estate they want. Then they send in the thugs in blue to chase out the crackheads while they lease, rent, and sell to upscale clientele. Once the area has been milked for what it's worth, tell the police chief that the ACLU is giving you a hard time, leave the homeless alone. Ghettofication commences, prices drop, and the same controlling elites buy it all back for pennies. Rinse and repeat. As long as they pace themselves slowly and keep the cycles going for at least 40 years, few realize what's going on, and you can just label them conspiracy kooks. [comment]
Bastards expired my Tap card, so bought another one for a buck plus the one-way fare of $1.50. Decided to skip sleep in favor of food. Maybe I can sleep on the bus. [comment]
So the OCTA fare is only $2 after all. I gathered from the website the cheapest option were $5 for a day pass. So, I'll get to Long Beach from Oceanside for a total of $3.75. Then I've got to hoof it a few miles to get to the metro and to Union station. Hoping to find some good, cheap Chinese food before the SF trip. Drank too much beer last night and my stomach is sour. [comment]
Back at Larry's Beach House, my favorite dive bar in Oceanside. Last time I sang karaoke here I did so badly it almost cured me. But I'm on my 2nd pint so who knows? [comment]
Can't find a bank or a Starbucks anywhere in Oceanside. Lots of sketchy 3rd-party ATMs I don't trust. Getting my coffee and Internet fix at Denny's but no place to plug in. [comment]
Got to the Oceanside transit center within 72 hours. Kit Carson would probably not be impressed, but he probably wouldn't diss me either.
The first 395 to San Clemente departs tomorrow at 0705. I plan to be on it. [comment]
Couldn't pass up the $1 tamale sign at Super Ranchito. Got pork. Not a lot of meat, but spicy and good tasting. [comment]
Carlsbad, the town that never ends, is finally behind me. Now in Oceanside. [comment]
Long night now over, resting feet and back at Starbucks in Cardiff by the Sea.
Found a good crop of aloe, finally, in Solana Beach, and snipped off a piece of a leaf. [comment]
Del Mar cop stopped to chat twice. I didn't feel like starting anything so long as he didn't ask my name, and he didn't. Guess all he wanted was to make sure I wasn't going to stay. [comment]
Goddamned arch supports are killing my feet. No more Chacos. [comment]
Fuck La Jolla and its shitty street layout, poor signage, lack of sidewalks. Back on Torrey Pines Rd. after an unexpected detour through the hills. [comment]
The Fatburger in Pacific Beach was a mistake, but I remembered meeting the owner at Lake Atitlan in 2007 or 2008. He had opened a restaurant of the same name there, can't remember if in Panajachel or San Pedro la Laguna.
Anyway, it didn't go down well, it wasn't that great, with tax it was almost $5 and service was very slow, possibly over a half hour wait.
Washed out my two wool shirts in the bay today, but they still aren't dry and now I'm cold even with my coat on. Should be OK once I start walking though.
Seems I've lost or misplaced my backup USB key. I thought it was in the waterproof bag around my neck, but it's not there and though a hole has appeared in it, the hole isn't big enough for it to fit through.
I've been at a Starbucks in La Jolla for a while. Should be in Oceanside sometime tomorrow. [comment]
The MUP along Harborside Drive, as it curves north and west heading past SD airport, is a major TAZ. No cops, lots of people "sleeping rough", easy to climb down on the rocks and pee against the seawall. There is also one restroom I saw open late. [comment]
Found a Rock Bottom brewpub in the Gaslamp district! $3.50 pints is more like it. Can't believe I've been overpaying at Yard House, The Field, and other pubs all these years. And the new Mug Club doesn't cost a penny, seems to me the previous one did. [comment]
Finally caught a nap on the grass next to the MUP between Harborside and Petco Park. Before that I had a large Sapporo and a spicy tuna roll for $5.95 each. The sushi was a bargain, the beer wasn't. And before that, I found a prickly pear plant, sliced and chewed part of a leaf, and apllied it to the, ahem, chafing mentioned earlier. Made it worse in the short term but it feels better now. [comment]
While still in Tijuana I was beginning to notice chafing in my asscrack, and it's getting worse mile after mile. Saw a couple of aloe plants I could have used, but they looked so anemic I didn't have the heart to cut one.
Forgot to mention, I saw those same fleshy-leaved plants growing on the street in Tijuana as I saw in La Paz. I'd sure like to get an ID on those. [comment]
The INMI agent at the bus station wouldn't take back my visa turistica, told me I had to take it back at the border. Got lost as usual, walked maybe 10 miles out of the way. Got to the border office before midnight, but the people there told me it wasn't open, and sent me down that back street to a gate at the end of a block. The guys there didn't understand what I wanted to do but I convinced one of them to keep the visa and I walked away. If they want the goddamned things back I sure wish they'd get their fucking act together.
Then I went to find cheap tacos and beer across the footbridge. No luck, it's like a ghost town, on a Friday night. So came back to an uneventful crossing of the US border. They weren't even running the luggage scanners. [comment]
Checkpoint just past the toll road entry. Last one? Maybe. [comment]
This must be Ensenada. I recognize the Costco. [comment]
Just had another non-intrusive "search". The soldier was laughing about something. I guess they must know we've all been through it several times. [comment]
Fourth military checkpoint, we didn't even have to get out of our seats, and I wasn't asked anything. Hoping that was the last, but I'm pretty sure there are more. [comment]
The third checkpoint was the least invasive so far; that was a few hours ago. Scheduled to arrive in Tijuana at 1904 California time. [comment]
At the first checkpoint the soldiers made me empty all my pockets, asking me if I were a terrorist, cracking jokes. The second one wasn't so bad. [comment]
Having my last cuppa at Café Frida for a while. Tonight I should be boarding a bus to Tijuana; 24 hours later I should be in San Ysidro, CA walking or taking public transit to Oceanside. Then Metrolink to LA, where on the night of the 23rd I board the Megabus for my $3.50 trip to San Francisco.
I'd walk all the way to Los Angeles if I could, but apparently there's still no legal way to walk through Pendleton. Free country my ass. I found the blog of a guy who crossed it by night in the shoulder of I-5, but I don't feel like taking the risk. [comment]
Ahmadinejad probably isn't as evil as he is being portrayed by Western media to be. Kim probably isn't as stupid as he's being portrayed either. Remember being fooled with "Ayatollah Assahola", or all the bumper stickers making Hussein out to be the devil? Me too. Not falling for it any more. [comment]
No luck with bitcoin after all. Taking a look at litecoin's profile:
% cumulative self self total time seconds seconds calls Ks/call Ks/call name 83.94 12694.23 12694.23 3930732341 0.00 0.00 xor_salsa8 15.38 15020.81 2326.58 3090320 0.00 0.00 scrypt_1024_1_1_256_sp
Pretty obvious where I should focus my efforts. [comment]
In the dream from which I just awoke, I was working at a primitive crematorium, at which I built a huge wood fire in a big cast-iron stove and burned the bodies, two at a time. Afterwards I'd slide the skeletons through a hole in the grate; the ashes were just left to build up on the floor below. 4 fingers broke off in my hand as I was guiding the 2nd skeleton through the hole, and I threw them in after it. [comment]
I have to wonder if most Mexicans have ever tasted real butter. Obviously the margarine manufacturers have carta blanca to mislabel their product as mantequilla pura de vaca. I know I've mentioned this before, but just got a reminder this morning at La Perla. This time the brand name is Gloria. [comment]
Pasted the SHA256Transform commented disassembly to pastebin.com. In case you weren't following previous blog posts, this routine is the biggest time hog in bitcoind. [comment]
Here is the latest profile data:
Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds. % cumulative self self total time seconds seconds calls s/call s/call name 69.30 60.87 60.87 1053409790 0.00 0.00 SHA256Transform(...) 7.43 67.40 6.53 1053409792 0.00 0.00 SHA256_update(...) 5.73 72.43 5.03 1053409791 0.00 0.00 SHA256_init(...) 5.69 77.43 5.00 1 5.00 79.04 BitcoinMiner(CWallet*)
Dividing 72.43 by 1053409790 shows we're back up to 6.88ns per call to SHA256_Transform, but some of that would be due to the extra call. Since the library routines obviously aren't taking up much of the time, I'm going to look at the rest of the code in SHA256Transform, and get rid of these "middleman" routines. [comment]
Looks like I cut the average execution time of SHA256Transform down from 64.6ns to 43.7ns just by changing the ByteReverse() function in util.h from the C code to the bswap instruction in assembly. However, I'm apparently not computing hashes much faster. Going to have to make small functions to call the library routines for SHA256 so the profiler shows me how much time is spent in them. [comment]
Nope. Tried that, still lost another .0005. Seems it's ignored, or I'm misunderstanding how to use it. [comment]
Lost another BTC0.0005, dammit! Guess it's necessary to bitcoind settxfee 0.00000001 before every freaking transaction? [comment]
Well, I guess I know where my efforts need to go:
[comment]Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds. % cumulative self self total time seconds seconds calls s/call s/call name 80.02 51.26 51.26 792915136 0.00 0.00 SHA256Transform(void*, void*, void const*)
Hacking bitcoin. After adding a debugging line to main.cpp, I'm seeing typically about 50 transactions being processed in 61ms. Now recompiling with -pg so I can run gprof and see which routines could benefit from an improved algorithm or some assembly language using the YMM registers.
If I can mine more efficiently with off-the-shelf hardware, or better yet, EC2 instances, I could possibly make a bit of money before I feel compelled to share it with the world. [comment]
Got bitcoind working from upstart; tried at first using the chroot and setuid stanzas, but it wasn't starting and I didn't want to research it any more, so I just used su:
[comment]ubuntu@bitcoin:~$ cat /etc/init/bitcoind.conf # run bitcoind as user ubuntu, respawning on failure # it has a memory leak so I expect it to get killed off occasionally start on stopped RUNLEVEL=[2345] stop on runlevel [!2345] respawn exec chroot /mnt su - ubuntu -c "bin/bitcoind" ubuntu@bitcoin:~$ cat bin/bitcoind #!/bin/bash sudo chroot /mnt su - ubuntu -c "bin/bitcoind $*" ubuntu@bitcoin:~$ bitcoind getbalance 0.00000001
And finally I can run both litecoind, as compiled on my Ubuntu EC2 instance, and bitcoind on my netbook; neither in mining mode. I shut that down after getting both my EC2 instances mining, and after reading that notebook computers tend to fry when mining because they can't cool fast enough.
knoppix@Microknoppix:~$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=~/lib/ubuntu12/ litecoind getbalance 0.00000000
~/lib/ubuntu12, of course, is where I placed the files I extracted from the tarball made in the previous blog. [comment]
Working on solving my library compatibility problems:
mkdir /tmp/litecoin-libs for file in $(ldd ~/hack/litecoin/src/litecoind); do if [ "${file:0:1}" = "/" ]; then cp $file /tmp/litecoin-libs/ fi done cd /tmp tar cvfj litecoin-libs.tbz litecoin-libs
Obviously filenames with spaces would break this; but this is Linux. Unix hackers just don't do that crap. [comment]
Followed the instructions to extend the KNOPPIX-DATA filesystem several times and the extra blocks were always lost on reboot. So I renamed knoppix-data.img to knoppix-data.img.disabled, rebooted, resized, tested using mount -o loop knoppix-data.img.disabled /mnt, verified the correct size using df; then rebooted, renamed back to knoppix-data.img, rebooted yet again, and I finally have my extra blocks. Dayumn. And every step I might have botched something and lost everything. [comment]
Breakfast at Café Canela on Madero, Huevos Rancheros, 35 pesos for a satisfying meal. Didn't feel much like eating all day yesterday, and still don't today, but am trying to keep my strength up.
Dicked around with bitcoind and litecoind most of yesterday and this morning. Having library compatibility problems. Sent a test transaction of BTC0.00000001, the smallest possible amount, to the default account on my aws-bitcoin server; it took a few minutes to get there, and I lost BTC0.0005 in the process! After that I bitcoind settxfee .00000001 so it wouldn't happen again. [comment]
Brought two new servers online in the Amazon cloud, one running bitcoind and the other litecoind. Gonna get serious with this mining shit. [comment]
I've been through hell ever since eating that sea hare egg mass earlier today. Just now pulling out of it, using some of the Silva mind-control techniques I picked up from that "superman" article a few weeks ago. Something weird is that I had this concept, while sleeping, that I had to navigate several (three?) different "families" of wellness before I'd be able to fight it off, and there was no scientific way of knowing if I had successfully accomplished each phase, other than by the results. I don't expect that to make sense now, maybe on some future date though.
Another key point is that I had to stimulate a "fever" by putting on as many warm clothes as possible. This burned away the toxins and/or pathogens. [comment]
You've probably seen the bumper sticker: "If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you're reading it in English, thank a veteran." or one of its many variants. Other people have discussed the implications before, but here's my take.
Except for the generations that are living during the occupation of a country, who may (or may not) have to endure learning a new language, who really cares? If I had grown up speaking Chinese, would I be sad on learning that English had been spoken in this part of the world before, and cry nostalgic tears? I grew up in central Maine, where French had once been the predominant language (after the Abnakis had been wiped out). Up through 4th grade, we were still being tought French in public schools in the 1960s. After that, it became an elective, and, though being half French extraction myself, I and many other French-named students dropped it like a hot potato, preferring to study Latin, German, or Spanish. People in general just don't give a damn what language they grow up speaking or what language their parents spoke.
Besides, how many veterans ever fought to prevent an invasion of the mainland U.S., regardless of the invader's will to change our language? I'm not a history buff, but I doubt that it's ever been any country's or group's high priority. [comment]
I've probably mentioned before, but I believe the world would be a much nicer place if everybody learned how to hunt and forage for sustenance, and tried it for at least 3 months of their lives. Nobody who did this could then be oblivious to the impact of man-made or man-propagated toxins on the environment; each would know he would be eating them sooner or later. [comment]
Yesterday evening on the malecon there was a kid on a type of "fishtail vehicle", the only propulsion action being swinging an arm back and forth, with the single drive wheel using the horizontal pressure and converting it into forward motion. The same wheel also steers. This one had the swing arm in front, but I want mine rear-mounted for amphibious use. [comment]
I awoke laughing in the wee hours of the morning from a dream. Two young people were using a term I had never heard before, "anti-moonbait". Apparently, in this dreamworld, people were very poor and mostly ate a mush of boiled grains. To make it more satisfying and spicy they'd add anything cheap and meaty they could find, like liverwurst or canned beef stew. But this "moonbait" got disgusting after a while so they'd have to find some anti-moonbait to get the taste out of their mouths. I recall it being Mountain Dew in the dream but I'm far from sure about that.
There was also a vignette of a bird bringing strips of huge pink-and-white flower petals for me to eat.
[P.S. I googled "moonbait" and its current "urban dictionary" meanings are far different.] [comment]
Ate a blossom and part of a leaf of the local "sow thistle" in La Paz today. It was a little bitter but definitely palatable. I'd say that's another keeper. [comment]
For years now I've had an item on my to-do list to write an rdiff (remote diff) program for comparing local files and directories with those on a remote server. Just now stumbled upon sshfs, which allows one to "mount" a remote computer's entire filesystem, using userfs, under a local mountpoint. Problem solved! [comment]
Just because I'm opposed to Monsanto doesn't mean I fear and decry all genetic engineering. I would love to see acacias that grow cocoa beans, and prickly pears that produce coffee. But that's not the kind of thing these current champions of GMOs are doing. They are focused on poisoning the earth with their patented chemicals and on keeping the world's food supply under their lock and key. [comment]
view blog for 2024-07
view blog for 2024-06
view blog for 2024-05
view blog for 2024-04
view blog for 2024-03
view blog for 2024-02
view blog for 2023-10
view blog for 2023-09
view blog for 2023-08
view blog for 2023-07
view blog for 2023-06
view blog for 2023-05
view blog for 2023-03
view blog for 2023-02
view blog for 2023-01
view blog for 2022-12
view blog for 2022-11
view blog for 2022-10
view blog for 2022-09
view blog for 2022-08
view blog for 2022-07
view blog for 2022-06
view blog for 2022-05
view blog for 2022-04
view blog for 2022-03
view blog for 2022-02
view blog for 2022-01
view blog for 2021-12
view blog for 2021-11
view blog for 2021-10
view blog for 2021-08
view blog for 2021-07
view blog for 2021-06
view blog for 2021-05
view blog for 2021-04
view blog for 2021-03
view blog for 2021-02
view blog for 2021-01
view blog for 2020-12
view blog for 2020-11
view blog for 2020-10
view blog for 2020-09
view blog for 2020-08
view blog for 2020-07
view blog for 2020-06
view blog for 2020-05
view blog for 2020-04
view blog for 2020-03
view blog for 2020-02
view blog for 2020-01
view blog for 2019-12
view blog for 2019-11
view blog for 2019-10
view blog for 2019-09
view blog for 2019-08
view blog for 2019-07
view blog for 2019-06
view blog for 2019-05
view blog for 2019-04
view blog for 2019-03
view blog for 2019-02
view blog for 2019-01
view blog for 2018-12
view blog for 2018-11
view blog for 2018-10
view blog for 2018-09
view blog for 2018-08
view blog for 2018-07
view blog for 2018-06
view blog for 2018-05
view blog for 2018-04
view blog for 2018-03
view blog for 2018-02
view blog for 2018-01
view blog for 2017-12
view blog for 2017-11
view blog for 2017-10
view blog for 2017-09
view blog for 2017-08
view blog for 2017-07
view blog for 2017-06
view blog for 2017-05
view blog for 2017-04
view blog for 2017-03
view blog for 2017-02
view blog for 2017-01
view blog for 2016-12
view blog for 2016-11
view blog for 2016-10
view blog for 2016-09
view blog for 2016-08
view blog for 2016-07
view blog for 2016-06
view blog for 2016-05
view blog for 2016-04
view blog for 2016-03
view blog for 2016-02
view blog for 2016-01
view blog for 2015-12
view blog for 2015-11
view blog for 2015-10
view blog for 2015-09
view blog for 2015-08
view blog for 2015-07
view blog for 2015-06
view blog for 2015-05
view blog for 2015-04
view blog for 2015-03
view blog for 2015-02
view blog for 2015-01
view blog for 2014-12
view blog for 2014-11
view blog for 2014-10
view blog for 2014-09
view blog for 2014-08
view blog for 2014-07
view blog for 2014-06
view blog for 2014-05
view blog for 2014-04
view blog for 2014-03
view blog for 2014-02
view blog for 2014-01
view blog for 2013-12
view blog for 2013-11
view blog for 2013-10
view blog for 2013-09
view blog for 2013-08
view blog for 2013-07
view blog for 2013-06
view blog for 2013-05
view blog for 2013-03
view blog for 2013-02
view blog for 2013-01
view blog for 2012-12
view blog for 2012-11
view blog for 2012-10
view blog for 2012-09
view blog for 2012-08
view blog for 2012-07
view blog for 2012-06
view blog for 2012-05
view blog for 2012-04
view blog for 2012-03
view blog for 2012-02
view blog for 2012-01
view blog for 2011-12
view blog for 2011-11
view blog for 2011-10
view blog for 2011-09
view blog for 2011-08
view blog for 2011-07
view blog for 2011-06
view blog for 2011-05
view blog for 2011-04
view blog for 2011-03
view blog for 2011-02
view blog for 2011-01
view blog for 2010-12
view blog for 2010-11
view blog for 2010-10
view blog for 2010-09
view blog for 2010-08
view blog for 2010-07
view blog for 2010-06
view blog for 2010-05
view blog for 2010-04
view blog for 2010-03
view blog for 2010-02
view blog for 2010-01
view blog for 2009-12
view blog for 2009-11
view blog for 2009-10
view blog for 2009-09
view blog for 2009-08
view blog for 2009-07
view blog for 2009-06
view blog for 2009-05
view blog for 2009-04
view blog for 2009-03
view blog for 2009-02
view blog for 2009-01
view blog for 2008-12
view blog for 2008-11
view blog for 2008-10
view blog for 2008-09
view blog for 2008-08
view blog for 2008-07
view blog for 2008-06
view blog for 2008-05
view blog for 2008-04
view blog for 2008-03
view blog for 2008-02
view blog for 2008-01
view blog for 2007-12
view blog for 2007-11
view blog for 2007-10
view blog for 2007-09
view blog for 2007-08
view blog for 2007-07
view blog for 2007-06
view blog for 2007-05
view blog for 2007-04
view blog for 2007-03
view blog for 2007-02
view blog for 2007-01
view blog for 2006-12
view blog for 2006-11
view blog for 2006-10
view blog for 2006-09
view blog for 2006-08
view blog for 2006-07
view blog for 2006-06
view blog for 2006-05
view blog for 2006-04
view blog for 2006-03
view blog for 2006-02
view blog for 2006-01
view blog for 2005-12
view blog for 2005-11
view blog for 2005-10
view blog for 2005-09
view blog for 2005-08
view blog for 2005-07
view blog for 2005-06
view blog for 2005-05
view blog for 2005-04
view blog for 2005-03
view blog for 2005-02
view blog for 2005-01
view blog for 2004-12
view blog for 2004-11
view blog for 2004-10
view blog for 2004-09
view blog for 2004-08
view blog for 2004-07
view blog for 2004-06
view blog for 2004-05
view blog for 2004-04
view blog for 2004-03
view blog for 2004-02
view blog for 2004-01
view blog for 2003-12