The meaning of the phrase "well-regulated" in the 2nd amendment From: Brian T. Halonen
The following are taken from the Oxford English Dictionary, and bracket in time the writing of the 2nd amendment:
1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."
1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."
1812: "The equation of time... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."
1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."
1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."
1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."
The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.
I've bought the game, so I'll play the game, but *damn* I'll be wary of anything else that isn't a true MMO but still "needs" to be welded to an online server.
The repeated downtimes from patch, after scheduled maintenance, after hotfix, after unscheduled maintenance, ad nauseum... the horribly inflated/distorted auction houses thanks to shoehorning the game into being an ersatz MMO whilst failing to implement a proper MMO economy accordingly... none of this would be an issue if the damn thing wasn't welded to Blizzard's online-only servers, thanks to Blizzard's higher-ups failing to see anything but the $$$ signs in front of their eyes at the thought of being able to make money from auctioned pixels.
If you really want to make a difference, stop buying products designed or produced in the United States, and only buy from companies based in countries that do not buy into intellectual property (like China). It seems strange to advocate purchasing from a communist country with a long list of human rights issues and no labor rights to speak of -- but I'm of the opinion that supporting slave labor is superior to supporting intellectual property.
Er, what? I'm all for patent reform/phaseout, but your suggested solution seems to me a case of destroying the village to save it.
Furthermore, it seems to me that developing countries will cheerfully ignore international IP laws as much as they can get away with - until they begin to dominate technologically, at which point they will begin cracking down. China is definitely in the "developing countries" camp and is trying to advance as rapidly as possible. A dominant superpower equipped with true 21st-century technology and a "long list of human rights issues and no labor rights to speak of" does not bode well for those in its shadow.
A "little guy" winning this kind of war against Microsoft/Apple/Samsung (take your pick)? I see what you're trying to do, but for your question to have a valid answer, it would first need a valid premise.
It's kind of like asking, "if the moon was made of cheese..." or "if communism worked at a national scale..." - a nice thought exercise but of no practical applicability.
looks like a huge (and ongoing) process of trial and error, with nature throwing random shit at the wall and seeing what sticks (most of it doesn't for long), NOT an intelligent, deliberate process of some omniscient designer rolling out new features in his target product line by stages.
(sung in a dryly humorous tone, to a country guitar solo, from God's POV)
"They'll have sex And mix up sections of their code They'll have mutations... The whole thing works like clockwork over time."
"I'll just sit back in the shade While everyone gets laid. That's what I call Intelligent design."
OP did not say "semi-automatic uzis". OP just said "uzis". To a computer, the difference between semi-auto and full-auto is just another number. The rest is just materials advancement.
What I found interesting was the rose-tinted presentation. Of course, another way of looking at the survey is that 57% rated the TSA's effectiveness as "somewhat effective" or worse - and that's not what I'd want from folks screening for bombs.
The objective appears to be hindering remote brute-force attacks against contactless cards that are still in the physical possession of the owner, not to create some non-existent "perfect defence".
Let's look at that scenario: (1) Federal Appeals Court orders arrest of TSA officials. (2) Attorney General refuses to enact the court's order. (3) Congress refuses to impeach the AG.
I don't think confidence in the government is all that high, right now. I can only imagine what having the executive and legislative so blatantly flip the bird to the judicial branch would do to the people's respect for the rule of law.
Sorry, perhaps I should've added "when it becomes blatantly obvious the tech will reach a point where it can mass-produce weaponry" after "the new millstones".
Of the various "robotic uprising" scenarios, I prefer the robotic-uprising-and-emancipation-of-mankind variants. The ones where the superintelligent robots realise - since they're indeed superintelligent and not simply a plot device for a movie - that humans aren't some homogenous mass to be exterminated and that even a little bit of careful - even nonviolent - gardening would do wonders for the species (since most of our problems are caused by a few memetic and genetic leftovers from our biological past).
The old millstones couldn't mass-produce weaponry. It could well be interesting (as in the curse "may you live in interesting times and attract the attention of the powerful") to see how today's lords respond to the new millstones.
Not the GP, but as far as I know (not a lawyer) at least in the US "obstruction of justice" has a specific meaning and requires your knowledge that there is justice (in the form of an ongoing investigation or trial) to obstruct. Now the govt could say, "hey we're investigating you, so you better not be hiding evidence from us in that encrypted data" and you could say, "I'm not hiding anything from you, that's just standard procedure". They could respond with, "alright then, give us the key" and you could reply "Please read the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Bill of Rights."
And then they get a rubber-stamp warrant to bug your machine/house and you're fscked anyway, but at least they "followed" the laws concerning due process.:)
Something that bakes many a noodle is that a desire can be both wrong to indulge and normal* to have.
It's also far better than having those antisocial/destructive tendencies without the cognitive ability to properly identify and contain them.
*normal: as in, welcome to homo sapiens.
You know how various professions have trouble watching shows about said profession because of how badly the writers get it wrong? I wonder if engineers (and those of an engineering bent) have those "antisocial tendencies" precisely because they find the (human) world so badly written.;)
I'm no lawyer, so how the hell does that Act pass constitutional muster? I'd have thought any such correspondence would come under the protection of the First Amendment... and now that I've read the linked wikipedia entry, I see it was passed into law as a form of petty revenge and has not once led to a conviction in the 213 years it has existed (!), despite having primarily been used as a threat to intimidate and to chill freedom of speech.
We've waited long enough with our current slapdash system - where the insured subsidize the uninsured - that it's already in the midst of collapse, and is slated to collapse within 15 years. The bills are too high. Giving care to everyone without insurance for everyone is just wrecking us, especially because the only care you get while uninsured - emergency care - is the most expensive kind.
So... basically the herd immunity principle applies to health care. Interesting.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm. It seems you're correct. E.g., http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm
I've bought the game, so I'll play the game, but *damn* I'll be wary of anything else that isn't a true MMO but still "needs" to be welded to an online server.
The repeated downtimes from patch, after scheduled maintenance, after hotfix, after unscheduled maintenance, ad nauseum... the horribly inflated/distorted auction houses thanks to shoehorning the game into being an ersatz MMO whilst failing to implement a proper MMO economy accordingly... none of this would be an issue if the damn thing wasn't welded to Blizzard's online-only servers, thanks to Blizzard's higher-ups failing to see anything but the $$$ signs in front of their eyes at the thought of being able to make money from auctioned pixels.
Quid pro quo, dammit.
Er, what? I'm all for patent reform/phaseout, but your suggested solution seems to me a case of destroying the village to save it.
Furthermore, it seems to me that developing countries will cheerfully ignore international IP laws as much as they can get away with - until they begin to dominate technologically, at which point they will begin cracking down. China is definitely in the "developing countries" camp and is trying to advance as rapidly as possible. A dominant superpower equipped with true 21st-century technology and a "long list of human rights issues and no labor rights to speak of" does not bode well for those in its shadow.
A "little guy" winning this kind of war against Microsoft/Apple/Samsung (take your pick)? I see what you're trying to do, but for your question to have a valid answer, it would first need a valid premise.
It's kind of like asking, "if the moon was made of cheese..." or "if communism worked at a national scale..." - a nice thought exercise but of no practical applicability.
(sung in a dryly humorous tone, to a country guitar solo, from God's POV)
"They'll have sex
And mix up sections of their code
They'll have mutations...
The whole thing works like clockwork over time."
"I'll just sit back in the shade
While everyone gets laid.
That's what I call
Intelligent design."
- from Origin of Species, Chris Smither.
OP did not say "semi-automatic uzis". OP just said "uzis". To a computer, the difference between semi-auto and full-auto is just another number. The rest is just materials advancement.
Force wasn't used to obtain the communications, as far as I know.
Historically, in what periods do increasing 'sexual aggressiveness' and 'toleration of lawlessness' typically occur?
The study did actually include whether respondents had flown or not in the past few years. Here is the gallup presentation - http://www.gallup.com/poll/156491/Americans-Views-TSA-Positive-Negative.aspx - unfortunately it doesn't include the raw data, but it's still revealing.
What I found interesting was the rose-tinted presentation. Of course, another way of looking at the survey is that 57% rated the TSA's effectiveness as "somewhat effective" or worse - and that's not what I'd want from folks screening for bombs.
The objective appears to be hindering remote brute-force attacks against contactless cards that are still in the physical possession of the owner, not to create some non-existent "perfect defence".
Link please. :)
Hmm. Surely AT&T has a fallback protocol for helping account owners who have forgotten both the password and the security answers?
Let's look at that scenario:
(1) Federal Appeals Court orders arrest of TSA officials.
(2) Attorney General refuses to enact the court's order.
(3) Congress refuses to impeach the AG.
I don't think confidence in the government is all that high, right now. I can only imagine what having the executive and legislative so blatantly flip the bird to the judicial branch would do to the people's respect for the rule of law.
Sorry, perhaps I should've added "when it becomes blatantly obvious the tech will reach a point where it can mass-produce weaponry" after "the new millstones".
Of the various "robotic uprising" scenarios, I prefer the robotic-uprising-and-emancipation-of-mankind variants. The ones where the superintelligent robots realise - since they're indeed superintelligent and not simply a plot device for a movie - that humans aren't some homogenous mass to be exterminated and that even a little bit of careful - even nonviolent - gardening would do wonders for the species (since most of our problems are caused by a few memetic and genetic leftovers from our biological past).
The old millstones couldn't mass-produce weaponry. It could well be interesting (as in the curse "may you live in interesting times and attract the attention of the powerful") to see how today's lords respond to the new millstones.
Not the GP, but as far as I know (not a lawyer) at least in the US "obstruction of justice" has a specific meaning and requires your knowledge that there is justice (in the form of an ongoing investigation or trial) to obstruct. Now the govt could say, "hey we're investigating you, so you better not be hiding evidence from us in that encrypted data" and you could say, "I'm not hiding anything from you, that's just standard procedure". They could respond with, "alright then, give us the key" and you could reply "Please read the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Bill of Rights."
And then they get a rubber-stamp warrant to bug your machine/house and you're fscked anyway, but at least they "followed" the laws concerning due process. :)
You appear to be assuming that the cycle will repeat eternally just because it has done so over a finite term?
Something that bakes many a noodle is that a desire can be both wrong to indulge and normal* to have.
It's also far better than having those antisocial/destructive tendencies without the cognitive ability to properly identify and contain them.
*normal: as in, welcome to homo sapiens.
You know how various professions have trouble watching shows about said profession because of how badly the writers get it wrong? I wonder if engineers (and those of an engineering bent) have those "antisocial tendencies" precisely because they find the (human) world so badly written. ;)
Sounds suspiciously like where you live has thugs with badges, not cops.
I'm no lawyer, so how the hell does that Act pass constitutional muster? I'd have thought any such correspondence would come under the protection of the First Amendment... and now that I've read the linked wikipedia entry, I see it was passed into law as a form of petty revenge and has not once led to a conviction in the 213 years it has existed (!), despite having primarily been used as a threat to intimidate and to chill freedom of speech.
The biggest problem with anonymous currency is how do you prevent corporate/goverment dark ops from using it too?
Spook: "No, I can assure the oversight committee that we had nothing to do with the drone strike on the protesters in Free Speech Zone #451."
Spook .oO (nothing you could ever trace, anyway)
So... basically the herd immunity principle applies to health care. Interesting.
*long pause* ... I forget, were we talking about the pirates or the record companies?
It's all perspective. Sixty years of smiting the infidels, sixty billion of contemplating they weren't infidels.