I mean, I know I am being bombastic, but really... who cares what they think. We don't need to change our ways or ideas because they are "offended." As a matter of fact the reason they want us to change... so they can enforce their views on the public. As a sovereign country they can do that even if it is distasteful to us. They don't have the right to extend that influence anywhere else because they aren't sovereign any where else.
Look at what Iran has just done. If they want to disconnect from the rest of the world they can do the same thing.
Sorry... when you think there is ONE system that works in all cases, you're the member of a cult.
Government agencies are not businesses. I have no problem with them getting other streams of income, but "the market" is not God. Not everything worth doing is going to make a profit, and when you start letting "the market" determine what is good for space exploration, you are at best going to have areas not explored and at worst dead astronauts.
Slander and libel are both illegal. They have both been illegal for a very long time going back to British laws. The one difference is that truth is considered a defense in the U.S. while in the U.K. it can still be considered irrelevant.
Lies are *not* protected speech when harm can be demonstrated.
To extend what AC said here, Corporate Personhood has a very long and sorted history in the U.S. It is considered a precedent by the court, but the way that it became a precedent was through a court clerk inserting a footnote. The history is important and it's something that people should know about. Wikipedia has a good reference here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood and the books it references explain the history very well.
One thing is clear: the founders and never wanted corporations to have too much power. They had direct knowledge of companies with too much power did through their experiences with the East India Company.
There are *a lot* of people, expats and otherwise, that would be absolutely fine with paying for some sort of international license for the BBC. I see this "you're stealing BBC" crap from Brits, but they are not giving an option to us and we're asking for it.
This is most assuredly false as Mitch Daniels has been named to head Purdue University starting in January.
A education-hating man that pulled all the funding he could out of Indiana's great University system... named president of a University. Welcome to 2012.
I'm running into the same issue. Early on when I got my newest TV I had to get 4 port HDMI switcher. Now that is full up and when the Ouya comes out (which I gave money to in the Kickstarter campaign) I will upgrade that to an 8. It's getting a little crazy with all the stuff that can be attached.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, I know I am being bombastic, but really... who cares what they think. We don't need to change our ways or ideas because they are "offended." As a matter of fact the reason they want us to change... so they can enforce their views on the public. As a sovereign country they can do that even if it is distasteful to us. They don't have the right to extend that influence anywhere else because they aren't sovereign any where else.
Look at what Iran has just done. If they want to disconnect from the rest of the world they can do the same thing.
yes
Yep.. that is EXACTLY what is happening in the U.S. and Europe. No differences there. None at all.
Oh great.
Sorry... when you think there is ONE system that works in all cases, you're the member of a cult.
Government agencies are not businesses. I have no problem with them getting other streams of income, but "the market" is not God. Not everything worth doing is going to make a profit, and when you start letting "the market" determine what is good for space exploration, you are at best going to have areas not explored and at worst dead astronauts.
Is it me or are we continuously using "profits" as a excuse for bad *anything* and pushing that idea to an extreme?
I take it you never had a power glove...
Please provide one study that shows this is true about minimum wage... because every study I have ever seen says exactly the opposite.
Yeah! How DARE they not allow corporations to walk all over them!
Farther than that, British English is International English.
One place I worked at contracted with a group of Mennonites that did ASP software development.
So yeah, there is a VERY wide range of technology they tolerate.
It doesn't cost very much to put up a station for charging DC devices through solar. They have plenty of solar power.
I think you missed the point. If they don't wish to detonate it then it is reusable, which is not true of a missile.
And you're fine with the dozens of claims Romney has said and shown in a matter of hours to be incorrect of absolutely misleading?
Go away. Really.. shut up and go away.
When corporations are treated as persons under the law it's not a huge jump to give them free speech rights.
That's essentially what Citizens United does. Money equates to speech rights. Legal corporate persons have freedom of speech.
It goes against at least a half dozen tenets that one can find in the Federalist papers, but there you go.
Well... since in the U.S. Speech is now equated to money then speech is only for those who pay for it.
That's a violation of at least two definitions of the word "free."
Slander and libel are both illegal. They have both been illegal for a very long time going back to British laws. The one difference is that truth is considered a defense in the U.S. while in the U.K. it can still be considered irrelevant.
Lies are *not* protected speech when harm can be demonstrated.
To extend what AC said here, Corporate Personhood has a very long and sorted history in the U.S. It is considered a precedent by the court, but the way that it became a precedent was through a court clerk inserting a footnote. The history is important and it's something that people should know about. Wikipedia has a good reference here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood and the books it references explain the history very well.
One thing is clear: the founders and never wanted corporations to have too much power. They had direct knowledge of companies with too much power did through their experiences with the East India Company.
There are *a lot* of people, expats and otherwise, that would be absolutely fine with paying for some sort of international license for the BBC. I see this "you're stealing BBC" crap from Brits, but they are not giving an option to us and we're asking for it.
The biggest threat to Iran *and* the Internet is Jeb Bush coming out of the GOP convention as a brokered compromise candidate.
Gee... I wonder how Reid could be proved wrong???
There has to be something bad in there if he's willing to go through the huge amount of political damage.
This is most assuredly false as Mitch Daniels has been named to head Purdue University starting in January.
A education-hating man that pulled all the funding he could out of Indiana's great University system... named president of a University. Welcome to 2012.
Well... every smartass has to point out there is some bad information in Wikipedia. The GOP should be right at home there.
Quick! Someone go make 200 edits to David Duke's Wikipedia entry!
I'm running into the same issue. Early on when I got my newest TV I had to get 4 port HDMI switcher. Now that is full up and when the Ouya comes out (which I gave money to in the Kickstarter campaign) I will upgrade that to an 8. It's getting a little crazy with all the stuff that can be attached.
I wish I could mod this. Slashdot needs a +5 Flamebait post today.