Bush and the Congress in general certainly did commit the single most successful act of terrorism in recent history. I'm not sure how showing ID would have prevented that though. The US public brought it on themselves, and today's world is a world away from the hacking culture of the 1980s
Still the case in the UK, no law saying you have to provide any ID on a domestic flight (although you'll need a boarding pass), certainly I don't whenever I fly domestically (rarely). Some airlines require ID for ticket purposes (to prevent you from selling your ticket to someone else). Flights between the UK and Ireland are a little trickier, you don't need a passport, as long as you can prove you are either British or Irish. If you don't have a photo ID you can fly from the UK to Belfast and then drive/train/bus to the Republic.
The requirement for a passport and appropriate visa on international flights departing from the UK is I think solely an airline requirement, as if you land in a country you don't have a right to immigrate to the airline gets fined. If you're flying privately it's a different matter.
Obviously you need a passport or other authority to travel when you get to the border of another country (Ireland being the obvious exception for the UK).
Either that or due to political restrictions preventing more housing being built, land is overvalued.
Any increase in wages is taken by landlords who increase the rent. The competition for a house isn't the next door house, it's not living in the city at all.
Have you ever considered that you pay the same amount and management keeps the change while not employing anyone else? I don't notice my bill being cheaper.
Rooftop solar is heavily subsidized almost everywhere it’s popular. Rooftop solar isn’t a good deal for utilities or their non-rooftop-solar customers.
I say this as someone who lived off the grid on solar for years; encouraging rooftop solar may have kickstarted the learning curve for the solar panel industry, and as such may have been pretty good social policy.
But it definitely owes its existence to subsidies.
These days grid scale solar makes lots of sense, rooftop solar still doesn’t (and the subsidies are now harder to defend).
> The solar Investment Tax Credit (ITC) is one of the most important federal policy mechanisms to support the growth of solar energy in the United States. Since the ITC was enacted in 2006, the U.S. solar industry has grown by more than 200x - creating hundreds of thousands of jobs and investing billions of dollars in the U.S. economy in the process.
The Section 48 commercial credit can be applied to both customer-sited commercial solar systems and large-scale utility solar farms. The rate is effectively at 30% until Treasury issues guidance on new wage and apprenticeship standards. Two months later, the rate will be at 6%, with an additional 24% (for a total of 30%) available for meeting these new labor standards.
So utility-scale solar farms can get the same 30% credit as rooftop solar. They're both tax-advantaged compared to (e.g.) building a new gas plant, but the rooftop credit isn't any higher, at least not on the federal level. Self-consumption from rooftop solar may avoid other taxes, like sales tax, but in many states there is no sales tax on residential electricity to begin with.
The interesting question of there being a subsidy for rooftop solar is the difference in subsidy to me between my roof having solar panels or my roof not having solar panels, not between my subsidy for my roof having solar panels or someone else's for their field having solar panels on it.
Subsidies are a terrible way to run energy policy because they can change quickly with politics. Big players stay away from big commitments to subsidy based markets.
Subsidies of “do this this year and we’ll pay you $X” work and are relied upon. Subsidies like the CF that was the SREC market are indeed highly suspect and should not be relied upon, as generators of SRECs can attest.
In Europe you have EU261, which if the flight is significantly delayed (hours rather than minutes) means you get several hundered euros in compensation. The exact delay and amount depends on the length of the flight.
Mind, standard operating procedure is for most if not all airlines to deny the compensation because of "unforeseeable circumstances".
Strike action because they don't pay their employees? Unforeseeable. The plane is broken? Unforeseeable. The airport cancelled the flight like it has been doing for the last 6 months? Unforeseeable.
Then you have to appeal to the regulator or small claims and most people just give up.
Sometimes they don't even refund your ticket after a cancellation and if you dare to chargeback they will prevent you from flying ever again.
Consumer rights are great, but often is hard to enforce them.
I've had plenty of success using the EU regulators to enforce 261/2004 compensation requests if an airline is not following the rules.
It can take a while for the regulator to get to your case, but it is only a 10-15 minute investment to find the relevant authority and to email to them with your information/circumstances. Then 2-4 months later the airline follows up to arrange payment. With budget flights the compensation can end up paying for multiple future flights.
My friend got this money from Aer Lingus for a flight that was delayed until the next day because of weather. They could have argued it was unforeseeable but they didn't. They just paid up. It doesn't always work this way.
The money was more than the flight was worth but the whole ordeal was terrible, literally every hotel in Dublin was booked out on every website (this wasn't the only flight cancelled, every one of them was) and she had to stay in this horrible dirty hostel. So it was kinda nice to get that money.
You can use name constraints on the CA, but they are a bit hit and miss when it comes to client support.
For a local CA with the CA only on one machine you're perhaps OK if you are careful, but once you share the server with a couple of collegues you are potentially into a world of hurt.
On OSX you can choose "Always Trust" or "Never Trust" for various purposes (code signing, SSL, EAP, etc).
Why can't I have "Ask first time", or "Trust only for specific domains"
Same with built in ones. That "Hong Kong Post" root CA raises some eyebrows with me, I'd love to set that to "Ask first time" on it.
