Virus on page?

On 24/03/2019 01.02, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 22:47:58 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 23/03/2019 20.29, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 12:17:07 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 22.51, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 21:36:55 -0000, Mayayana
wrote:

"Jonathan N. Little" wrote

| Commander Kinsey wrote:
|
| The question should be, why are you deliberately preventing them
from
| editing it? Why do you care
|
| Copyright protection on original creative work. Allow others to
view
and
| print but not modify.
|

*** That, too. But in this case it's not even that.
It's just common sense and good business. The
same reason we don't write out checks, receipts and
bills in pencil. The recipient has no right to change
them and such a change could be harmful as well
as criminal.

** I can only assume that Cmr. Kinsey has
decided to play devil's advocate. His repeated
questioning makes no sense.

Pssst, I can change your bill by simply screengrabbing it.* Your
feeble
attempts are futile.* Anyone who wants to change something will do so.

That's why PDFs can be signed. Any modification is verifiable.

After printing?


That's a modification per se. A printed copy is invalid as proof. You
have to pass on the original bill PDF, not the paper. I can refuse to
pay if I get the paper only.

Er, it's you billing me remember?


For that, if I use a signed PDF, the paper is invalid.



--
Cheers, Carlos.

On Sun, 24 Mar 2019 11:59:14 -0000, Jonathan N. Little wrote:

Chris wrote:
On 23/03/2019 23:59, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 23:42:52 -0000, Jonathan N. Little
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 20:19:27 -0000, Jonathan N. Little
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 19:38:35 -0000, Jonathan N. Little
wrote:



snip

Didn't explain how it apply to me and my copyright that prevents
modification of my artwork.

Because you made the artwork once yet want paid more than once. Is it
that hard for you to understand?

How exactly does an artist get paid more than once for a painting or a
sculpture...?


That is what I am trying to understand. I said my copyright that
prevents modification and you can reasonably do that with PDF. If it
were analogous to performers and musicians I would get compensation each
time the artwork is viewed, or at least when resold.

If you don't, why are you copyrighting it?

--
My truck does not leak. It's just marking its territory!

On Sun, 24 Mar 2019 11:27:27 -0000, Chris wrote:

On 23/03/2019 23:59, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 23:42:52 -0000, Jonathan N. Little
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 20:19:27 -0000, Jonathan N. Little
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 19:38:35 -0000, Jonathan N. Little
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 04:39:41 -0000, Jonathan N. Little
wrote:


snip

Also big difference when it is a *vector* PDF. And editing text is
more
difficult. Yes you *can* take a screenshot. There are those who
always
steal; but editing my artwork without written consent would
violate the
copyright my clients agree to with the project.

Capitalist ****.


Do you get paid for the work you do? I'm an artist, and deserve to
get
paid for my work...and we don't even get royalties like musicians and
actors...

You're as bad as them, you expect to get paid more than once for one
piece of work.

How the hell you you come to that conclusion?

Bricklayer builds one house, gets paid once. He wants more money, he
does more work.

Musician records one song, gets paid millions of times over 30
years.Sheer laziness.


Didn't explain how it apply to me and my copyright that prevents
modification of my artwork.

Because you made the artwork once yet want paid more than once. Is it
that hard for you to understand?

How exactly does an artist get paid more than once for a painting or a
sculpture...?

Prints? It's more the music industry that rips people off.

--
My truck does not leak. It's just marking its territory!

On 24/03/2019 15:46, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 24/03/2019 01.02, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 22:44:27 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 23/03/2019 20.21, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 12:09:12 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 17.52, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 12:20:49 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 21.23, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 19:17:19 -0000, Chris
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:56:24 -0000, Chris
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 11:23:13 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 19/03/2019 00.16, Commander Kinsey wrote:.

You'd be hard pressed to develop anything worse than Adobe's
Acrobat
Reader.* Just try printing something from it, you won't get
anything
remotely like what's on the screen.* I often have to
screengrab
it and
print it from Paintshop Pro.

Huh? I never had any such problem printing from adobe reader
reliably.

I have, I never get the size I expect.* Easier to put it into a
photo
editor with a screengrab, then you can fit to page etc.

Pdfs are vector formats and by definition can be scaled to any
size
without
losing resolution*. A pdf print dialogue box always has a
"shrink to
fit"
and/or "scale to page" option.

By taking a screenshot your rasterising the page and losing the
benefit of
the pdf.

* Unless it had been saved as raster format. But that's dumb
so not
common
these days.

I think the last thing I tried to print was a calendar - I'd
found a
website that generates calendars for any month and year in pdf
format.* I
wanted to print most of the page, cutting off the borders, but
acrobat
reader was unable to, so I just screengrabbed.* I got the
resolution of
the monitor, which is fine.

Anything should be able to print properly.* PDF doesn't help
here.

Actually it does. That's the whole point of the format. It is
completely
device agnostic so it doesn't matter what you're viewing it on or
printing
it with it should print as the author designed it. You often see
forms as
word files and they never print or render properly.

But what about how I want it?

That's not the main use case for pdfs. It's mainly a read-only
format -
forms excepted.

However, you can edit them in libreoffice draw or Adobe Illustrator
plus
others. Word allegedly reads them, but always makes a pig's ear of
them.

Why the hell would I want something I can't adjust before
printing?* I
might want only the top half, enlarged to fit the page, etc.

But PDFs are not designed for you to alter at will. They are
designed to
be printed as is, just expanded or shrinked to page.

Why design something you can't use properly?* Not everyone wants
things
exactly the same.

Because that is not "use properly" :-P

When I send a PDF it is print as /I/ intend, not as you intend.

Because you're more important than me?* You need your head examined.* I
want to print it as I want, not as you want.


It is my document. I decide. You want to edit my document? Ask for an
editable copy. I may pass it on, or I may refuse.

And that's how it is, that's the purpose of PDF, no matter how angry you
get.

People like you don't get my business.


Don't worry about that. You don't get mine.

Haha! :-D

Please read he Message-ID:

--
David B.
Devon, UK

On Sun, 24 Mar 2019 10:54:28 -0000, Chris wrote:

On 23/03/2019 19:25, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 16:57:33 -0000, Chris wrote:

On 20/03/2019 19:00, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:47:53 -0000, Chris wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 08:36:47 -0000, Chris wrote:

Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 18/03/2019 13.40, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 03:26:19 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 18/03/2019 00.15, Commander Kinsey wrote:
WARNING! Do not click the misspelt link below (between
asterisks)
unless you know your computer is protected.

On Stirling Council's parking page
https://my.stirling.gov.uk/media/442...park-guide.pdf


There is a link to the thistle centre car park, which they have
misspelt
as **** http://www.thethsitles.com/ **** instead of
http://www.thethistles.com/

Question 1) Is this a virus? It just bleeps very loudly through
the
speakers and asks me to click to update something.
Question 2) Can this be reported to someone? The company they
rent the
domain name from perhaps?

(I've already advised Stirling Council to correct their spelling
error)

The first page is a PDF, not a web page

Technically yes, but the PDF is displayed in my browser and has
links to
click just like a webpage.

Depends on the local configuration - in my machine it doesn't :-)

and looking at the properties
it was generated on 2014. It is possible that the link is
outdated and
now points to somewhere else than intended, because of a typing
error or
no maintenance of the site.

It must be a typing error, it would never have been spelt thsitle.

Anyway hopefully they will update it now I've warned them. I'm
surprised nobody else came across it before, parking in Stirling
is so
bad you have to research first! Even if you pay, hardly anywhere
allows
more than a 2 hour stay.

Wow. I have never seen something like that here

To be fair there's not a lot to do in Stirling so 2 hours is
plenty

There is the rather magnificent Stirling Castle, nearby, and there's
plenty
of parking. Some of it free IIRC
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_Castle

I'm doing jury duty (which could be for the whole day), and has no car
park. Everything should have a car park and not expect you to find
somewhere else!

Ah, yeah. That's a pain in the arse. Does the court have any
suggestions?

I found two nearby streets with all day parking for £4. Maybe the court
insisted on it? No other streets allow over 2 hours stay, even if
you pay.

Good luck with the jury duty.

Apart from them paying me **** all to do it, I'm quite looking forward
to it - I've always wanted to have a go.

The court system has **** all money, plus it's our civic duty,

Why on earth should people be required to sort out other people's
problems for free?

Because paying them can be misconstrued as an inducement and could
pervert the course of justice.

Paying them precisely what they lost in earnings would not be so. But they don't even do that. There's an upper limit.

--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet. Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.

On 24/03/2019 12.18, Chris wrote:
On 23/03/2019 22:36, Mayayana wrote:
"Chris" wrote

| It makes perfect sense to get rid of these bit of paper and
| simply instruct our banks to perform transactions on our behalf.
|

Â*Â*Â* You're paying them a fee for every transaction, for
no reason. You give your cash to the bank, they pay
the merchant, and the merchant has to give them a cut.

You pay a fee whenever you take cash out of an ATM. Face it, there's
always a fee somehwere.

Here there is no fee if you use the ATM that belongs to your bank.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On Sun, 24 Mar 2019 10:27:49 -0000, Chris wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 16:55:01 -0000, Chris wrote:

On 20/03/2019 18:58, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:50:23 -0000, Chris wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 08:45:32 -0000, Chris wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
Oh, Youtube changed to HTML5 4 years ago :-)
Surprising as I didn't think all browsers took up HTML5 for quite a
while.

So how come a big company like Adobe made such a piece of crap, and
didn't fix it?

They didn't make it, they bought it. I guess in the end it was too
hard to
maintain and required a specific install for every os. Just like
java which
is all also dying. HTML 5 is os agnostic by default. IOS not
supporting it
was the killer blow.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash

Who uses IOS? I doubt the percentage is very high. Isn't that just
small Apple devices?

Lots of people. At it's height about 60% of the market.

Now it's 23% of mobiles and 75%'of tablets
http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-...bile/worldwide
http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-...blet/worldwide

What market are you referring to? Why are you omitting real computers -
laptops and desktops?

If you'd read the link you'd have seen it was worldwide. As a proportion
of all 'computers' iOS is the third most common OS in the world
http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share

I call bull****. Phones are a small percentage of all computing devices.
iOS is only on those silly little things, not real computers. A
telephone is to make phonecalls. A computer is for computing.

You may want to believe that, but it's denying reality.

If you use a 4 inch screen with no mouse or keyboard to do what I do on a 20 inch screen, you're a fool.

As for your percentages, it's certainly not true around here (in
Scotland where people watch their money). I know of about 15 tablets
owned by friends and neighbours, and not one is Apple. I know of about
30 phones, and only 1 is Apple.

I'm also in Scotland and iphones are pretty common. I get the bus to
work and see a cross-section of people on their phones. I can easily
believe it's 20% iphone.

So 20% of people are gullible fools easily parted with their money, doesn't surprise me.

So you both call bull**** and aren't surprise?

Different claims you made, remember? Percentage of all OSs, and percentage of phones.

It's a fashion statement, not a sensible decision.

No one is denying there is an element of that, but it is where the world
is.

Only for morons.

--
"Justice isn't blind...she's cross-eyed!"--Yakko Warner

On Sun, 24 Mar 2019 15:46:18 -0000, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 24/03/2019 01.02, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 22:44:27 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 23/03/2019 20.21, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 12:09:12 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 17.52, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 12:20:49 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 21.23, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 19:17:19 -0000, Chris
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:56:24 -0000, Chris
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 11:23:13 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 19/03/2019 00.16, Commander Kinsey wrote:.

You'd be hard pressed to develop anything worse than Adobe's
Acrobat
Reader. Just try printing something from it, you won't get
anything
remotely like what's on the screen. I often have to
screengrab
it and
print it from Paintshop Pro.

Huh? I never had any such problem printing from adobe reader
reliably.

I have, I never get the size I expect. Easier to put it into a
photo
editor with a screengrab, then you can fit to page etc.

Pdfs are vector formats and by definition can be scaled to any
size
without
losing resolution*. A pdf print dialogue box always has a
"shrink to
fit"
and/or "scale to page" option.

By taking a screenshot your rasterising the page and losing the
benefit of
the pdf.

* Unless it had been saved as raster format. But that's dumb
so not
common
these days.

I think the last thing I tried to print was a calendar - I'd
found a
website that generates calendars for any month and year in pdf
format. I
wanted to print most of the page, cutting off the borders, but
acrobat
reader was unable to, so I just screengrabbed. I got the
resolution of
the monitor, which is fine.

Anything should be able to print properly. PDF doesn't help
here.

Actually it does. That's the whole point of the format. It is
completely
device agnostic so it doesn't matter what you're viewing it on or
printing
it with it should print as the author designed it. You often see
forms as
word files and they never print or render properly.

But what about how I want it?

That's not the main use case for pdfs. It's mainly a read-only
format -
forms excepted.

However, you can edit them in libreoffice draw or Adobe Illustrator
plus
others. Word allegedly reads them, but always makes a pig's ear of
them.

Why the hell would I want something I can't adjust before
printing? I
might want only the top half, enlarged to fit the page, etc.

But PDFs are not designed for you to alter at will. They are
designed to
be printed as is, just expanded or shrinked to page.

Why design something you can't use properly? Not everyone wants
things
exactly the same.

Because that is not "use properly" :-P

When I send a PDF it is print as /I/ intend, not as you intend.

Because you're more important than me? You need your head examined. I
want to print it as I want, not as you want.


It is my document. I decide. You want to edit my document? Ask for an
editable copy. I may pass it on, or I may refuse.

And that's how it is, that's the purpose of PDF, no matter how angry you
get.

People like you don't get my business.


Don't worry about that. You don't get mine.

Throwing away customers ain't a good business model.

--
A bartender is just a pharmacist with a limited inventory.

On Sun, 24 Mar 2019 15:47:11 -0000, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 24/03/2019 01.02, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 22:47:58 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 23/03/2019 20.29, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 12:17:07 -0000, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 22.51, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 21:36:55 -0000, Mayayana
wrote:

"Jonathan N. Little" wrote

| Commander Kinsey wrote:
|
| The question should be, why are you deliberately preventing them
from
| editing it? Why do you care
|
| Copyright protection on original creative work. Allow others to
view
and
| print but not modify.
|

That, too. But in this case it's not even that.
It's just common sense and good business. The
same reason we don't write out checks, receipts and
bills in pencil. The recipient has no right to change
them and such a change could be harmful as well
as criminal.

I can only assume that Cmr. Kinsey has
decided to play devil's advocate. His repeated
questioning makes no sense.

Pssst, I can change your bill by simply screengrabbing it. Your
feeble
attempts are futile. Anyone who wants to change something will do so.

That's why PDFs can be signed. Any modification is verifiable.

After printing?


That's a modification per se. A printed copy is invalid as proof. You
have to pass on the original bill PDF, not the paper. I can refuse to
pay if I get the paper only.

Er, it's you billing me remember?


For that, if I use a signed PDF, the paper is invalid.

Paper is a valid form of bill in law.

--
"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." -Mark Twain

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

For example, the table inside the document might only
have "ABCDE" from Times Roman. If you want to edit
the text string in the PDF file, and you need an "F",
it's not in the table. You may receive an error message
from the PDF editor that "the font is not available".

although technically possible, there is zero advantage in doing so.

It's got nothing to do with "zero advantage".

it does.

it's not worth the trouble to choose only the characters used.

It is a program doing it automatically. Not us.

the entire font is embedded if needed. there's no advantage to choosing
individual characters, automatic or not.

Size of the file.

the file is much bigger than the font.

in the age of terabyte hard drives, saving a few kilobytes or even a
megabyte is not worth the trouble.

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

For example, the table inside the document might only
have "ABCDE" from Times Roman. If you want to edit
the text string in the PDF file, and you need an "F",
it's not in the table. You may receive an error message
from the PDF editor that "the font is not available".

although technically possible, there is zero advantage in doing so.

The advantage is saving space in the PDF file.

fonts are very small (*much* smaller than the content of the pdf
itself), pdfs can be compressed and disk space is cheap anyway.

On the contrary, when the PDF content is about 1 MB, the size of the
embedded fonts is important.

if the pdf is that small, it's unlikely to have any embedded fonts.

In article , Chris
wrote:

| Why? Because you're uncomfortable using cash. I
| wouldn't mind so much but I end up subsidizing fools
| using debit cards and phones. And you think that makes
| sense?
|
| You're not saving any money by paying with cash, so what's the point?
|
I don't get that logic. You *are* saving money. Not
for yourself directly. But you're reducing the merchant
costs.

My point is that you're subsidising non-cash transactions regardless as
the fees are already costed into the price of the product. If cash is
genuinely cheaper there'd be a cash price and a non-cash price.

many times there is, with gas/petrol stations being the most common
example:

https://patch.com/img/cdn/users/1718...f7bd2c8ae561b8
58a6a1d0041d20a65.jpg
http://alloveralbany.com/images/gas_...n_cent_discoun
t.jpg
https://cdn.newsday.com/polopoly_fs/.../httpImage/ima
ge.JPG_gen/derivatives/landscape_768/image.JPG

Some
organisations (mostly the airlines) tried to add fees for credit card
transactions, but have been told they can't do that.

airlines won't normally accept cash (and if they do, you're flagged as
a possible terrorist and get the 'special treatment').

adding a surcharge for credit cards is generally illegal, but offering
a cash discount is fine. a 'convenience fee' which is legally not the
same as a surcharge, is also legal.

tl;dr a cash price can sometimes be cheaper.

In article , Commander Kinsey
wrote:

It is my document. I decide. You want to edit my document? Ask for an
editable copy. I may pass it on, or I may refuse.

And that's how it is, that's the purpose of PDF, no matter how angry you
get.

People like you don't get my business.


Don't worry about that. You don't get mine.

Throwing away customers ain't a good business model.

it is when they cost more than they revenue they generate.

Chris wrote:

You pay a fee whenever you take cash out of an ATM.

The credit unions in my area have an agreement. No ATM fees
when any member uses any other members ATMs. Very convenient.

Face it, there's always a fee somehwere.

I'm a member of a credit union and it pays me cash dividends
depending on its financial condition (just like a stock). It
also pays me higher interest rates on my checking and CD
accounts than local banks. I've been a member for over
50 years now. Why would I change...

There have been some high profile crashes here in the
UK.

Here in the US also. Covered banks and credit unions are
government guaranteed to $250,000.

"Chris" wrote

| ?? I don't pay ATM fees.
|
| ATM transactions have a fee associated with them to the originating bank.
|
As Carlos said, that's not the case here, either.
The originating bank is my bank and they don't
charge me.

| So... why else not to use debit cards, besides the
| unnecessary cost?
|
| What is the unnecessary cost of using debit cards?
|

Why is this point so hard for people to follow? Debit
cards are different from charge cards. They charge the
merchant a fee + % for simply transferring the money.
Even if you just buy a pack of gum, it's as though you
wrote a check. Your bank collects a fee. The merchant
has to pay that fee. And they have to make up their
profit somehow. It's an entirely unnecessary scam run
by banks -- essentially making cash transfer an official
business operation that requires banking services.

Some people make the claim that it costs money to
accept cash, but that doesn't hold water except in
automated situations, like a parking garage with no clerk.
Where I live, merchants must accept cash, anyway.


| A third aspect is security. I don't want to have a debit
| card because there's limited security if your money
| is stolen. If, for instance, a card skimmer empties your
| bank account, in most cases you're only covered if
| you act quickly.
|
| You're always covered in the case of theft, unless the theft was down to
| your own negligence.
|

Maybe in England. Not in the US. Again, I'm
talking about debit cards, not credit cards. If you
use it with a business account or if you don't
report it promptly you're not covered. If your
account is emptied while you're away on vacation
and you didn't find out for a few days, you could
conceivably lose a large amount, or everything.

You might want to check on your bank, just
to be sure. A lot of people in the US are not
aware of debit card limitations. Like you, they just
assume it's like a credit card. I've seen cases of
people who lost a fortune because they kept money
in a personal corporate account and didn't realize
it wasn't insured.


| As it stands now, I do at least have ATM printouts
| and monthly bank statements. So if a massive solar flare
| burnt out electronics tomorrow I'd be in the short line
| to claim my cash. You'd be in the line for people who
| have no record of existing save for a plastic card,
| with embedded data that can no longer be read.
|
| I can still prove who I am and know my bank account details - that's all
| I need.
|

How? You just threw away all the paper, remember?
You'll have to depend on your personal relationship
with the bank president. Hopefully you're not having
an affair with his wife. This could be his chance to
disappear you.

| That's getting into several different points. First,
| I was questioning debit cards, not credit cards.
|
| Makes no difference for online sales. Either are usable and debit are
| sometimes preferable as credit cards can be charged differently.

You keep missing my whole point about the
critical differences between the two kinds of cards,
which I've repeated over and over. I give up.

| Banking in general is not free. You pay fees, but you may not see them.
| Bank transfer fees, card transaction fees with retailers, mortgage or
| overdraft repayment interest, etc. This is why banks make *a lot* of
| money. We all contribute to that whether we like it or not.
|
Sorry, no. You seem determined to believe that
I'm paying fees for all my transactions. I'm not.
The merchant pays a fee when I use a credit card,
which I only do for a few specific cases. No one gets
any fee otherwise.

You're grasping at straws, imagining that your
actions make no difference because, "They got ya
coming and going, anyway".

| Everyone* has a debit card here.
| From the age of 13/14 you can get a debit card.
|

Interesting. I guess that's why Brits write books like
1984 while Yanks write books about local militias
fighting back against corrupt gov't takeovers. Brits
are oddly compliant with societal control.

Though to be fair, I think the general distrust of
oversight and regulation here is more connected
with lack of coherent culture. Most countries are
also ethnicities. Tribes of a sort. Americans don't
share that kind of connection. We don't have our
own language or ethnicity. Our shared culture is little
more than network TV and sports teams. And the last
time someone told us we'd have to pay a fee for
purchases we dumped a boat full of tea and started
a war.