Wickard v Filburn is probably the case your looking for... where not participating in a form a commerce is still participation and thus subject to regulation.
Nevermind that it's virtually identical to the plan that Romney implemented in his home state.
Romney signed the bill with 8 gubernatorial vetos, of which 6 were overridden by the state legislature. The state legislature at the time that bill was passed, by the way, was 6 Republicans and 34 Democrats in the Senate and 21 Republicans and 139 Democrats in the House. It did pass with near unanimous support (only 2 dissenting votes in the house). That said, the bill was introduced and pushed and presented by Democrats and what they had put out was different from what Romney proposed. Given Romney's specific vetos and that the legislature was Democrat controlled, I doubt that the "Romneycare" plan was close to the plan he had suggested.
I mean, call me short-sighted, but it seems to me that even an organization like Microsoft wouldn't be opposed to donating licenses to charities. Is there a reason that alternative wasn't attempted?
You can come close to doing most of those in Saints Row IV.
You're allow to make rude gestures to pedestrians or even run at them while totally naked and thrust your crotch in their face as you knock them down. You also get the power to, as the protagonist puts it, "I can set things on fire" so you can burn pedestrians as you see fit.
Unfortunately, I do not believe Saint's Row IV is available on any Nintendo console.
The issue sounds more like the base game is being loaded under demos, thus costs nothing, rather than under the store where you purchase items. Unfortuntaely, demos are tied to PS+ accounts. The answer seems more like that if instead of a free demo you should list the item for sale at $0.
If you sell D2 and keep LoD you're selling your license key to install and play Diablo 2 not just install it. So if you want to sell your D2 key then you better uninstall D2. I have a feeling reinstalling LoD and running it would be very very difficult.
Well it is an economic problem. SpaceX has cheaper launches so it does have some headroom to increase prices to cover the increased costs of refurbishment. What we should be looking at is SpaceX's goal for the first stage. They don't want to water land but instead land land near the launch site. The shuttle landed a thousand miles or more from where it launched and it required a specially modified 747 to carry it back to Florida. That's a huge cost and may have made the extra costs of refurbishing engines not worth it. If SpaceX can get the first stage to return to Florida then the transportation costs are going to be minimal. Bring out a crane and load it on a flatbed. On top of that a water landing means you don't have to worry about any degradation from sea water not withstanding the logistics of getting a ship out to the landing area in order to bring the stage back in.
It's not just refurbishment but also recovery. In this case, NASA might be more on the money than CNES because the shuttle was landed in an easily recoverable location and not in the ocean. Even so, there was a cost in transporting the shuttle back to Florida after it landed. A first stage, of a rocket might easily be transportable by truck which would be vastly cheaper than loading it onto a specially designed 747.
SpaceX has also said that they wanted to have their first stage return and soft land near the launch site so I'm think that they're looking to find ways to significantly decrease the cost of recovery and transportation which may be a huge portion of the costs that made NASA and CNES avoid reusable craft.
For example, how many people would vote for Common Core knowing the complete issue? I have yet to hear any media station talk about the copyright issues, lack of educators on the boards controlling content, lack of ability for educators to influence change in content or curriculum, and how the majority of that information is trademarked and can not be changed. If people knew the rational arguments against, it would not be taken so lightly. What they have today is nothing from media on why it's bad, just that "some [insert ad hominem] is against it".
Indiana was discussing the reasons why common core was bad. The state also stepped away from the program.
The casus belli used for an invasion doesn't diminish that an invasion occurs. The post I responded to suggested that we never invaded Mexico, which we did on two occasions during the Mexican revolution at the beginning of the 20th century. The first was the Tampico Affair where we invaded and occupied Veracruz and the second was Pershing's Punitive Expedition in which we invaded Mexico in order to capture Pancho villa and crush the villistas. That's ignoring any of the potential invasions that the US might have performed prior to the 20th century while expanding westward which I'm sure occurred given that little Alamo spat.
Slashdot Mirror
The one that is semi-edible?
Wickard v Filburn is probably the case your looking for... where not participating in a form a commerce is still participation and thus subject to regulation.
Line item vetoes.
Nevermind that it's virtually identical to the plan that Romney implemented in his home state.
Romney signed the bill with 8 gubernatorial vetos, of which 6 were overridden by the state legislature. The state legislature at the time that bill was passed, by the way, was 6 Republicans and 34 Democrats in the Senate and 21 Republicans and 139 Democrats in the House. It did pass with near unanimous support (only 2 dissenting votes in the house). That said, the bill was introduced and pushed and presented by Democrats and what they had put out was different from what Romney proposed. Given Romney's specific vetos and that the legislature was Democrat controlled, I doubt that the "Romneycare" plan was close to the plan he had suggested.
I mean, call me short-sighted, but it seems to me that even an organization like Microsoft wouldn't be opposed to donating licenses to charities. Is there a reason that alternative wasn't attempted?
Yes.
To quote the submitter.
Being a die-hard OSS geek
Anonymous coward bantering.
10/10. Would read again.
My only hope is that these anonymous cowards are just two anonymous cowards and not three or more.
I dunno. I think it can be good.... if directed by Michael Bay.
Ah yes, not a true scots... er gamer.
I saw a 6 foot rabbit once. It was during a showing of Harvey.
Peter Woodman? That sounds like a porno name.
That is one mother fucking badass bee. I must have this product.
So what you're saying is that the LGBT community is equivalent to trolls.
San Francisco is, allegedly, 15% LGBT. However the average for the US as a whole is something less than 5%.
You can come close to doing most of those in Saints Row IV.
You're allow to make rude gestures to pedestrians or even run at them while totally naked and thrust your crotch in their face as you knock them down. You also get the power to, as the protagonist puts it, "I can set things on fire" so you can burn pedestrians as you see fit.
Unfortunately, I do not believe Saint's Row IV is available on any Nintendo console.
Correct. People didn't free themselves through valiant Civil Rights struggle.
Bureaucrats and Politicians in Washington did it for them. And they should get down on their knees and thank them every day for it!
Yes, get down on their kness and thank them.... orally.
So you're a gay fish?
The issue sounds more like the base game is being loaded under demos, thus costs nothing, rather than under the store where you purchase items. Unfortuntaely, demos are tied to PS+ accounts. The answer seems more like that if instead of a free demo you should list the item for sale at $0.
If you sell D2 and keep LoD you're selling your license key to install and play Diablo 2 not just install it. So if you want to sell your D2 key then you better uninstall D2. I have a feeling reinstalling LoD and running it would be very very difficult.
This is close.....
http://randomperspective.com/i...
Well it is an economic problem. SpaceX has cheaper launches so it does have some headroom to increase prices to cover the increased costs of refurbishment. What we should be looking at is SpaceX's goal for the first stage. They don't want to water land but instead land land near the launch site. The shuttle landed a thousand miles or more from where it launched and it required a specially modified 747 to carry it back to Florida. That's a huge cost and may have made the extra costs of refurbishing engines not worth it. If SpaceX can get the first stage to return to Florida then the transportation costs are going to be minimal. Bring out a crane and load it on a flatbed. On top of that a water landing means you don't have to worry about any degradation from sea water not withstanding the logistics of getting a ship out to the landing area in order to bring the stage back in.
It's not just refurbishment but also recovery. In this case, NASA might be more on the money than CNES because the shuttle was landed in an easily recoverable location and not in the ocean. Even so, there was a cost in transporting the shuttle back to Florida after it landed. A first stage, of a rocket might easily be transportable by truck which would be vastly cheaper than loading it onto a specially designed 747.
SpaceX has also said that they wanted to have their first stage return and soft land near the launch site so I'm think that they're looking to find ways to significantly decrease the cost of recovery and transportation which may be a huge portion of the costs that made NASA and CNES avoid reusable craft.
For example, how many people would vote for Common Core knowing the complete issue? I have yet to hear any media station talk about the copyright issues, lack of educators on the boards controlling content, lack of ability for educators to influence change in content or curriculum, and how the majority of that information is trademarked and can not be changed. If people knew the rational arguments against, it would not be taken so lightly. What they have today is nothing from media on why it's bad, just that "some [insert ad hominem] is against it".
Indiana was discussing the reasons why common core was bad. The state also stepped away from the program.
The casus belli used for an invasion doesn't diminish that an invasion occurs. The post I responded to suggested that we never invaded Mexico, which we did on two occasions during the Mexican revolution at the beginning of the 20th century. The first was the Tampico Affair where we invaded and occupied Veracruz and the second was Pershing's Punitive Expedition in which we invaded Mexico in order to capture Pancho villa and crush the villistas. That's ignoring any of the potential invasions that the US might have performed prior to the 20th century while expanding westward which I'm sure occurred given that little Alamo spat.
Pershing's Punitive Expedition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
Let's start with all these damn clamshell packages.