If your idea can't muster a few thousand supporters in your state or nationwide to donate $10-$100 each, then maybe it is your idea that is defective, not the lack of anyone hearing it.
Citizens freely associate and donate to mutual interests every day to accomplish local and national goals. Perhaps you should get involved and help out instead of sitting on Slashdot complaining.
The sad FACT is, lobbyists bribe elected officials, effectively placing power over the entire country's policies and laws, in the hands of powerful corporations and select (wealthy/elite) citizenry. Lobbyists as they operate today have effectively created a hidden ruling class.
This is so laughably a paranoid fiction that is beyond rebuttal.
Really? So the numerous agricultural combine lobbyist groups, comprised of small farm holders, is "big cash"? La Raza, the largest Hispanic lobbying group, is "big cash"? How about lobbyists from the ABA, or the AMA?
This notion that only "big cash" hire lobbyists is a myth. And its a myth perpetrated by the ignorant that can only rail against "the MAN" while sitting on their couches doing nothing.
prefer to represent lobbyists and monied interests occurred first
Lobbyists that represent and monied interests that are, well, citizens entitled to petition government just the same as you. The elected are their servants as well. It is beyond hubris why people like you believe that your voice is more important than the voice of a "monied interest", which has more to lose from overweening government power than you do, more likely than not.
You have an easy alternative. Start a PAC and represent the opinion of people like yourself. Write your representatives. Run for office. There are 300 million of us in the US. Nobody ever guaranteed that anybody would listen to you.
claiming NASA issued its pro-nuclear statement last year in response to political pressure to put nuclear weapons in space
And I claim that I own Mannhatten. One absurdity deserves another.
Of course it has to be a "nefarious" (TFA's words, not mine) plot to get nukes into space. Notwithstanding that there's no use for such a policy, seeing as how an ICBM works just fine.
The only thing this protects you from is credit fraud which where an initial credit check is performed -- and incidentally means if you actually want a change in credit, a cell phone, car, etc you have to contact the credit agency ahead of time so they will allow it
This is not true. A fraud watch, as the spokesman for the company obviously discovered to his detriment, does nothing to prevent a creditor from giving credit. A creditor does not even have to call you to verify with a fraud alert. Only a credit security freeze will block a creditor from giving credit without your approval, and Lifelock doesn't do those.
Inaccurate. This is not the first "space lawyer." It is the first "space law certificate" from a law school to a graduating law student. There are a multitude of "space lawyers" already.
And just to be nitpicky, just because this person graduates from law school with this certificate doesn't make them a "space lawyer." Graduating from law school doesn't make you a lawyer. Passing the bar makes you a lawyer, and the certificate doesn't mean a damn.
instead of spending 10 minutes on plot and 2 hours on combat
Its been my experience that combat is the most memorable part of the game. People I know recall fun and funny moments of DND combat from nearly 20 years ago, not plot points.
Note that I don't believe that the states should establish religion either, but your statement that I quoted is false
You are correct, until the Fourteenth Amendment was passed. The Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Bill of Rights, or at least most of it, to the States.
I'm interested in why they blocked it in the first place
Because it involves an area of potential regulation that touches on interstate commerce, the Constitutional prerogative of the federal government, and Congress has preempted the field of regulation in that area. Congress has effectively removed that area of regulation from state control. That's why.
No need, the Supreme Court has spelled it out already. It's a logical corolary to the principle of separation of powers.
Not everything is "spelled out" in the Constitution. The Constitution "spells out" generalized powers and a scheme of government based on English common law and principles of political philosophy. Much of the functioning of the federal government is based on reasoning from these basic principles and scheme. The Constitution is not a universe unto itself.
Is the EPA now part of the Executive Branch? Is there any actual basis in law for this claim?
LOL! This is why political discussions on Slashdot are so laughably out of touch.
For the record, yes. And so is every other agency in the federal government, except a few like the GAO which are specialized agencies that are by statute independent or act directly for Congress.
This is the biggest "duh" of gee-whiz! breakthrough science research, ever. We are, by definition, domesticated animals. Of course our evolution has been shaped by human choice. This is some kind of revelation?
No, no, no, you misunderstand what's going on here. Each module doesn't wholesale import the entire domestic law of the "owning" State. The only issue is basically choice of law - the law that governs whose rules of decision control in any given situation of potential liability. To put it in geek terms, it is "meta-law". Law about law. Nothing more. There's no substantive law issues here.
a fair judicial system created from scratch is far more costly and difficult than a military tribunal with a committee of members elected by each member nation
Both are far more costly and difficult than using each member state's existing judicial system. There's no need to create some international court for the ISS. The issue isn't whether somebody will be held liable; the issue is who's law controls which "somebody" will be liable.
It isn't important only in criminal actions. It's most obviously, and more commonly, important for tort. Who is responsible when a section of space junk deorbits and falls on somebody's head? Or, who is responsible when an astronaut has an accident and injures him/herself on the space station? Who is responsible if one astronaut accidentally injures another on the space station? These aren't merely academic questions; they are the sort of legal questions that are important for individuals that may be hurt in space. These sorts of liability issues are particularly important for future commercial access to space.
Slashdot Mirror
If your idea can't muster a few thousand supporters in your state or nationwide to donate $10-$100 each, then maybe it is your idea that is defective, not the lack of anyone hearing it.
Citizens freely associate and donate to mutual interests every day to accomplish local and national goals. Perhaps you should get involved and help out instead of sitting on Slashdot complaining.
The sad FACT is, lobbyists bribe elected officials, effectively placing power over the entire country's policies and laws, in the hands of powerful corporations and select (wealthy/elite) citizenry. Lobbyists as they operate today have effectively created a hidden ruling class.
This is so laughably a paranoid fiction that is beyond rebuttal.
Really? So the numerous agricultural combine lobbyist groups, comprised of small farm holders, is "big cash"? La Raza, the largest Hispanic lobbying group, is "big cash"? How about lobbyists from the ABA, or the AMA?
This notion that only "big cash" hire lobbyists is a myth. And its a myth perpetrated by the ignorant that can only rail against "the MAN" while sitting on their couches doing nothing.
prefer to represent lobbyists and monied interests occurred first
Lobbyists that represent and monied interests that are, well, citizens entitled to petition government just the same as you. The elected are their servants as well. It is beyond hubris why people like you believe that your voice is more important than the voice of a "monied interest", which has more to lose from overweening government power than you do, more likely than not.
You have an easy alternative. Start a PAC and represent the opinion of people like yourself. Write your representatives. Run for office. There are 300 million of us in the US. Nobody ever guaranteed that anybody would listen to you.
claiming NASA issued its pro-nuclear statement last year in response to political pressure to put nuclear weapons in space
And I claim that I own Mannhatten. One absurdity deserves another.
Of course it has to be a "nefarious" (TFA's words, not mine) plot to get nukes into space. Notwithstanding that there's no use for such a policy, seeing as how an ICBM works just fine.
The only thing this protects you from is credit fraud which where an initial credit check is performed -- and incidentally means if you actually want a change in credit, a cell phone, car, etc you have to contact the credit agency ahead of time so they will allow it
This is not true. A fraud watch, as the spokesman for the company obviously discovered to his detriment, does nothing to prevent a creditor from giving credit. A creditor does not even have to call you to verify with a fraud alert. Only a credit security freeze will block a creditor from giving credit without your approval, and Lifelock doesn't do those.
Lifelock is worthless.
Inaccurate. This is not the first "space lawyer." It is the first "space law certificate" from a law school to a graduating law student. There are a multitude of "space lawyers" already.
And just to be nitpicky, just because this person graduates from law school with this certificate doesn't make them a "space lawyer." Graduating from law school doesn't make you a lawyer. Passing the bar makes you a lawyer, and the certificate doesn't mean a damn.
There's one at the Hill AFB flight museum in Layton, Utah as well. You can walk right up and touch it.
There's a B-2 parked out front that you can walk under. That's quite a sight.
instead of spending 10 minutes on plot and 2 hours on combat
Its been my experience that combat is the most memorable part of the game. People I know recall fun and funny moments of DND combat from nearly 20 years ago, not plot points.
The problem isn't that the Government is taking away any rights you have, the problem is believing you have rights that you don't
God, I wish I had mod points to mod this insightful...
take the navigators for example, they are pretty well described in the book, and look nothing like cuttle fish
They do in the later books, however. Herbert evolved many of his creations over the course of the series. The Tleilaxu, for example.
Note that I don't believe that the states should establish religion either, but your statement that I quoted is false
You are correct, until the Fourteenth Amendment was passed. The Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Bill of Rights, or at least most of it, to the States.
THAC0
THAC0 predated 2E by several years. It was standard in Dragon magazine before 2E was ever contemplated. IIRC, it was in Unearthed Arcana even.
What they dicovered is the first scientific evidence for the theory that culture evolves
Poppycock. There's over a century of such evidence. It's a little field called anthropology.
Only on Slashdot would the precise, legal answer be labelled "troll." Pathetic ignoramuses.
I'm interested in why they blocked it in the first place
Because it involves an area of potential regulation that touches on interstate commerce, the Constitutional prerogative of the federal government, and Congress has preempted the field of regulation in that area. Congress has effectively removed that area of regulation from state control. That's why.
No need, the Supreme Court has spelled it out already. It's a logical corolary to the principle of separation of powers.
Not everything is "spelled out" in the Constitution. The Constitution "spells out" generalized powers and a scheme of government based on English common law and principles of political philosophy. Much of the functioning of the federal government is based on reasoning from these basic principles and scheme. The Constitution is not a universe unto itself.
Is the EPA now part of the Executive Branch? Is there any actual basis in law for this claim?
LOL! This is why political discussions on Slashdot are so laughably out of touch.
For the record, yes. And so is every other agency in the federal government, except a few like the GAO which are specialized agencies that are by statute independent or act directly for Congress.
That was too subtle for Slashdot.
This is the biggest "duh" of gee-whiz! breakthrough science research, ever. We are, by definition, domesticated animals. Of course our evolution has been shaped by human choice. This is some kind of revelation?
No, no, no, you misunderstand what's going on here. Each module doesn't wholesale import the entire domestic law of the "owning" State. The only issue is basically choice of law - the law that governs whose rules of decision control in any given situation of potential liability. To put it in geek terms, it is "meta-law". Law about law. Nothing more. There's no substantive law issues here.
Yeah, wow, it's just been called that for, like, a decade.
f a bunch of sailors of different nationalities are out in the middle of the ocean on a UN ship, whose law applies?
The law of the nation the ship is flagged under. The UN doesn't have ships, it only can charter the ship flagged under a State.
a fair judicial system created from scratch is far more costly and difficult than a military tribunal with a committee of members elected by each member nation
Both are far more costly and difficult than using each member state's existing judicial system. There's no need to create some international court for the ISS. The issue isn't whether somebody will be held liable; the issue is who's law controls which "somebody" will be liable.
It isn't important only in criminal actions. It's most obviously, and more commonly, important for tort. Who is responsible when a section of space junk deorbits and falls on somebody's head? Or, who is responsible when an astronaut has an accident and injures him/herself on the space station? Who is responsible if one astronaut accidentally injures another on the space station? These aren't merely academic questions; they are the sort of legal questions that are important for individuals that may be hurt in space. These sorts of liability issues are particularly important for future commercial access to space.