Not to be a troll, but that was probably one of the greatest exchanges i've ever read on Slashdot... thank you for making me spit my Cheerios back in to my bowl from laughing so hard.
If this ends up being a valid way to argue against getting a speeding ticket, the next step I see will be people speeding like hell, and then hacking their car's GPS records to show they were going at the speed limit.
While I see your concern, I think that this would have the more profound effect of being able to consider data other than the police officer's radar gun in determining if a driver broke the law. I doubt it would open the door for GPS to be used as a defense in all cases, especially considering your concerns... However adding another route of defense against possibly overzealous cops is fine by me.
We are lucky we live in the United States of America. We have a Constitution that guarantees that congress can make no law "abridging the freedom of speech". Errr....wait.....ummmmm. Well, I mean... except POLITICAL speech. I'm sure when they wrote the 1st amendment they didn't really mean political speech. I wonder why the supreme court just ignores this ?
I'd imagine it's because they want to make elections as fair as possible. Limiting what candidates can and can't do/say limits the quantity/severity of smear campaigns. Imagine if campaigns were allowed to say/publish whatever they wanted without being limited by campaign laws. It'd probably be quite ugly. Same thing with money, yes it's true that whoever has the most money has a better chance of winning. However, without strict fundraising laws candidates like Ron Paul would stand NO chance whatsoever.
I would honestly hope the FEC has better things to do than worry about prosecuting a comedian.
Well considering that their primary job is to keep elections fair and legal, this entirely fits into their jurisdiction. Yes it is humor and not meant to be taken seriously, but the FEC takes THEIR job very seriously and as such Colbert must follow the same rules as everyone else.
Slashdot Mirror
Aha, so Wine is defined recursively... but where is the base case?!?! omg infinite recursion!
It could be a joke but I'm not sure... my sarcastic humor radar isn't picking it up! I'll let you know when I know for sure
And also linked from www.digbuzz.com is a site named "Solidot", which looks like a total rip-off of Slashdot: solidot.org.
Not to be a troll, but that was probably one of the greatest exchanges i've ever read on Slashdot... thank you for making me spit my Cheerios back in to my bowl from laughing so hard.
What the hell is a mashup? Holy buzzword Batman
Real men allocate their own memory.
:D
While I see your concern, I think that this would have the more profound effect of being able to consider data other than the police officer's radar gun in determining if a driver broke the law. I doubt it would open the door for GPS to be used as a defense in all cases, especially considering your concerns... However adding another route of defense against possibly overzealous cops is fine by me.
I'd imagine it's because they want to make elections as fair as possible. Limiting what candidates can and can't do/say limits the quantity/severity of smear campaigns. Imagine if campaigns were allowed to say/publish whatever they wanted without being limited by campaign laws. It'd probably be quite ugly. Same thing with money, yes it's true that whoever has the most money has a better chance of winning. However, without strict fundraising laws candidates like Ron Paul would stand NO chance whatsoever.