Most banks don't have a customer base as large as BofA's. That's why most banks do not need to request a state of origin in order to give the system a hint as to which LPAR your account info resides...
I wouldn't worry yourself too much about my understanding of our system of government.
Ah, the Constitution! Finally you've discovered some authority to carry your argument (the substance of which I wasn't addressing - only your choice of authority to support your argument).
I feel compelled to point out that much like the Declaration of Independence, the pledge of allegiance does not carry the force of law.
Nice try, but in order for the 14th amendment to be implicated (and therefore for Congress to have power to enforce its protections), there must be either a sufficient degree of state involvement with the action or a failure by the state to act in circumstances where the Constitution affirmatively requires action.
Since none of the Several States has a draft, how exactly does the 14th amendment apply?
Re-read the first part of the 14th Amendment, Section 1: "No state shall..." Maybe you meant to say Due Process?
You are correct in that the judiciary will not decide on the reasonabless of a law if they can discern a clear intention on the part of the legislature to accomplish that result. After all, legislatures are presumably elected to carry out the will of the people. In many cases, judges have no other choice but to enforce bad laws (except, of course, those that are unconstitutional or violate other principles).
However, where the legislature's intent is unclear, or lacking entirely, it is up to the judiciary to say what the law is. Those decisions carry the force of law.
In some jurisdictions, there are crimes that have been around forever, i.e., larceny, that are not defined by statute, but are nonetheless in effect. Courts rely on previous cases, or "common" or "judge-made," law, to proceed.
Even when statutes have been enacted, case law is necessary to flesh out sometimes badly worded, overly brief or ambiguous passages in statutes.
Judges "make" law all the time. This is an accepted and essential part of the common law system that we inherited from England. Although I agree with you that there are limits to what the courts can do, it is not correct to say that the courts cannot "make" law. As decided in Marbury v. Madison, it is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. When combined with the principle of stare decisis, that power cannot be said to be anything but the ability to "make" law...
Explain to me exactly how the Bill of Rights, which sets forth limits on the federal gov't (and sometimes the States), applies to HP, a private company?
The protections afforded by the Geneva Convention do not extend to unlawful combatants, i.e.,
* Those who engage in combat while hiding among the civilian population to avoid retaliation
* Those who do not wear uniforms representing their affiliation with a national force (more to the point - are not distinguishable from the population at-large)
* And since the GC is an agreement between nation-states, please explain to me how al Qaeda combatants qualify as members of ANY nationally recognized force (Afghan or otherwise). Would you have us believe that the al Qaeda fighters are members of the Saudi, Yemeni, (insert native country) armed forces, engaging in combat under the direction of aforementioned countries and therefore afforded to protections under the GC?
As an avid follower of Slashdot, I have a keen interest in open source systems, intellectual property, and technology. In my former life, I was an engineer, and I hold an advanced degree in mechanical engineering. I currently make a living working for a business consulting firm performing large scale technology implementations. Whether it's e-business, high-tech, or Internet-related, I experience a great deal of "Slashdot" in the workplace everyday.
I would like to know how much demand exists in the field of law for a person with a skill set and background comparable to my own. Can the current market for lawyers who possess a deep technical background offset the cost of three years of law school, especially in comparison to what I would be making if I stayed with technology consulting?
Judging from the sheer number of issues surrounding technology and the law raised in this forum, it seems that the open source/technology community could certainly benefit from more advocates with roots in technology. I'm just deciding whether it's worth it to make the move myself...
I used to be involved in testing composites at one of the Air Force Research Laboratories and the consensus was that this thing would be almost impossible to implement. The crux of the matter was that the X-33 was designed using materials that simply haven't been invented yet. The increase in strength and decrease in weight of the structural elements required was ridiculously farfetched considering the current pace of materials science at the time. I'm not saying it will never happen, but a lot of $$ was spent without any realistic hope of real progress.
Re:Other fabrication methods using EM fields
on
Making Small Change
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
Most banks don't have a customer base as large as BofA's. That's why most banks do not need to request a state of origin in order to give the system a hint as to which LPAR your account info resides...
I wouldn't worry yourself too much about my understanding of our system of government.
Ah, the Constitution! Finally you've discovered some authority to carry your argument (the substance of which I wasn't addressing - only your choice of authority to support your argument).
I feel compelled to point out that much like the Declaration of Independence, the pledge of allegiance does not carry the force of law.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the Declaration of Independence does not carry the force of law in this country.
Nice try, but in order for the 14th amendment to be implicated (and therefore for Congress to have power to enforce its protections), there must be either a sufficient degree of state involvement with the action or a failure by the state to act in circumstances where the Constitution affirmatively requires action.
Since none of the Several States has a draft, how exactly does the 14th amendment apply?
Re-read the first part of the 14th Amendment, Section 1: "No state shall..." Maybe you meant to say Due Process?
You are correct in that the judiciary will not decide on the reasonabless of a law if they can discern a clear intention on the part of the legislature to accomplish that result. After all, legislatures are presumably elected to carry out the will of the people. In many cases, judges have no other choice but to enforce bad laws (except, of course, those that are unconstitutional or violate other principles).
However, where the legislature's intent is unclear, or lacking entirely, it is up to the judiciary to say what the law is. Those decisions carry the force of law.
In some jurisdictions, there are crimes that have been around forever, i.e., larceny, that are not defined by statute, but are nonetheless in effect. Courts rely on previous cases, or "common" or "judge-made," law, to proceed.
Even when statutes have been enacted, case law is necessary to flesh out sometimes badly worded, overly brief or ambiguous passages in statutes.
Judges "make" law all the time. This is an accepted and essential part of the common law system that we inherited from England. Although I agree with you that there are limits to what the courts can do, it is not correct to say that the courts cannot "make" law. As decided in Marbury v. Madison, it is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. When combined with the principle of stare decisis, that power cannot be said to be anything but the ability to "make" law...
"bona fide" purchasers, those who have no knowledge that the property was stolen, are afforded protections under common law.
guaranteed to protect against fall-apart!
So what's your point? The Bill of Rights still does not apply to HP!
Explain to me exactly how the Bill of Rights, which sets forth limits on the federal gov't (and sometimes the States), applies to HP, a private company?
In the legal sense, stealing depends *entirely* on depriving the owner the use of his property.
That is why it is problematic to apply traditional notions of property rights to intangible items such as information.
Demonstrating actual damages is generally not required for intentional torts, i.e., trespass.
Hey dickhead, it was Arthur Andersen, not Andersen Consulting.
Interesting. Photoshop has a built-in batch interface you can use to script things like converting images.
The protections afforded by the Geneva Convention do not extend to unlawful combatants, i.e.,
* Those who engage in combat while hiding among the civilian population to avoid retaliation
* Those who do not wear uniforms representing their affiliation with a national force (more to the point - are not distinguishable from the population at-large)
* And since the GC is an agreement between nation-states, please explain to me how al Qaeda combatants qualify as members of ANY nationally recognized force (Afghan or otherwise). Would you have us believe that the al Qaeda fighters are members of the Saudi, Yemeni, (insert native country) armed forces, engaging in combat under the direction of aforementioned countries and therefore afforded to protections under the GC?
I would like to know how much demand exists in the field of law for a person with a skill set and background comparable to my own. Can the current market for lawyers who possess a deep technical background offset the cost of three years of law school, especially in comparison to what I would be making if I stayed with technology consulting?
Judging from the sheer number of issues surrounding technology and the law raised in this forum, it seems that the open source/technology community could certainly benefit from more advocates with roots in technology. I'm just deciding whether it's worth it to make the move myself...
The Wright Brothers were from Dayton, OH. I've seen the bike shop there. 'Nuff said.
I used to be involved in testing composites at one of the Air Force Research Laboratories and the consensus was that this thing would be almost impossible to implement. The crux of the matter was that the X-33 was designed using materials that simply haven't been invented yet. The increase in strength and decrease in weight of the structural elements required was ridiculously farfetched considering the current pace of materials science at the time. I'm not saying it will never happen, but a lot of $$ was spent without any realistic hope of real progress.
Where in Dayton was the firm?