Law, courts, and prosecutors can almost NEVER prove reasoning. I believe this is why reasoning usually isn't part of laws. (Even intent is hard to prove, although that's usually part of laws. They use proxies to determine intent in court.)
While that is true, flying doesn't work the way you think it does.
You do not have the presumption of innocence before the FAA. They can just decide you're guilty and then you have to spend a lot of time and money to prove you're not.
Yes, I think it is unconstitutional as well, but that is how it is...
The line here is "operate like a business" or "flying for compensation" not who's paying the costs. Your employer can say provide you an aircraft you can fly for free (thus paying all the costs) and you can take that aircraft on a business trip as a private pilot. However, they CANNOT pay you to take passengers or cargo places in the aircraft as part of your job function. If folks just happened to be passengers heading to the same meeting, it's starting to get into the grey area but as long as the flying is incidental to your real job it's likely going to be OK with the FAA.
This is one of the best answers here...
If you are an accountant and you happen to be a pilot, and the company wants three of you to go to Orlando for an accountants convention and the company is offering to pay your airline tickets, or gas money, or whatever to get there, and all three of you are going because ALL THREE OF YOU are accountants, then yes, the company can pay for the whole airplane rental.
But if you're Bob from accounting, and the company needs 3 lawyers to go to Orlando to a lawyer convention and you didn't need to go, then the company CAN'T rent a plane and have you fly there, even if they don't pay you anything for the flight.
Bernie is kidding himself if he thinks that will be easy or simple.
Now I will say, we COULD have free college in this country, if we wanted to, but not using the current system. Too much "for profit" in the system. Same reason Obamacare doesn't work.
No, he cannot. He can pay a share of the costs, but not all of them. The reasoning behind that includes the fact that being able to log hours as PIC is a benefit to the pilot, and so is "remuneration" in part for the flight.
In short, if you're flying your friend to go fishing, you better be going fishing as well.
The FAA was right here, assuming you care about the law. Now we can discuss if the law is wrong (in some ways I'd agree it is), but that isn't the FAA's job, to decide if it is right or wrong.
Flytenow got it wrong by thinking that a lack of profit means there is no "common carriage". That isn't how it works.
You don't have to make a profit, or even have the goal of profit, from the FAA's point of view.
Non-pilots will have trouble with this one, and even many pilots get it wrong. I had many debates with new pilots and even new flight instructors who wanted to read into the FAA regs what they WANTED to read.
If you are flying someone somewhere that you really don't know, and they so much as buy you lunch, it is common carriage and thus illegal without an air carrier certificate. In fact, lunch isn't even required, because they consider "quid pro quo" to be compensation.
Now you don't have to AGREE with this, but arguing with the FAA is like arguing with the cops when they pull you over for a speeding ticket. Pointless and a bad idea.
The FAA takes a VERY narrow view on this topic and it would take an act of Congress to change it.
---
Note: I actually DON'T agree with the FAA here, I'm not defending them, but they are correct according to the rules as THEY see it, and right now the FAA is largely the final decider here. (beyond the appeals courts which is expensive and fails more often than it works, but it does sometimes)
---
Source: My over 10 years in aviation, including running a Part 135 on-demand air carrier as well as working for another one as a pilot, plus my owning a half dozen aircraft some used for commercial operations.
Not immediately. But if you shutdown the inverters, the voltage builds up in the cells until the backflow of electrons cancels out the solar induced flux, generating heat. Hotter cells have a shorter lifetime.
Factor in that some updates have broken my machine and were automatically backed out (and re-installed, and backed out), and that Windows will sometimes meditate for an hour or three before getting its update lists and another hour or three before performing the updates I permitted - I spend far more time administering the beast than using it.
That tells me that it is time for a clean install of Windows 7 for you...
Either that, or something is wrong with the hardware...
I do this for a living, I've installed Windows 7, 8, 8.1, and 10 on a lot of different machines, ranging from brand new to 10 years old.
Windows is not broken, it works amazingly well, but it doesn't tolerate a broken install or flaky hardware.
The bug where Windows 7 says that the network cable has been pulled, the one where you have to remove the power cord for 20-30 minutes? Seen that.
If the apartment complex changes it's leasing terms, you pretty much can get out of your lease instantly, as the original contract you signed is now invalid.
It depends on where you live of course, but in general, the apartment complex CAN'T change its leasing terms, and you DO have the right to keep living there.
You don't have to move, that would be a burden on you.
The complex simply can't change the terms, and you have the right to live there peacefully without harassment.
Tennant laws exist for a reason, you may be a "renter", but you have rights. Don't become a landlord without understanding the laws for tennants, you HAVE to follow them or you'll be out a LOT of money.
So if some guy gets caught parking his van behind an elementary school, and he's got duck tape, a bed and a puppy in back, you're just going to say, "No story here" because the cops make him move along?
Exactly... A Judge will say, "means, motive, and opportunity..."
The means and opportunity were there, so what is the motive?
He would have a tough defense unless he can afford to hire a good lawyer.
Slashdot Mirror
Law, courts, and prosecutors can almost NEVER prove reasoning. I believe this is why reasoning usually isn't part of laws. (Even intent is hard to prove, although that's usually part of laws. They use proxies to determine intent in court.)
While that is true, flying doesn't work the way you think it does.
You do not have the presumption of innocence before the FAA. They can just decide you're guilty and then you have to spend a lot of time and money to prove you're not.
Yes, I think it is unconstitutional as well, but that is how it is...
The line here is "operate like a business" or "flying for compensation" not who's paying the costs. Your employer can say provide you an aircraft you can fly for free (thus paying all the costs) and you can take that aircraft on a business trip as a private pilot. However, they CANNOT pay you to take passengers or cargo places in the aircraft as part of your job function. If folks just happened to be passengers heading to the same meeting, it's starting to get into the grey area but as long as the flying is incidental to your real job it's likely going to be OK with the FAA.
This is one of the best answers here...
If you are an accountant and you happen to be a pilot, and the company wants three of you to go to Orlando for an accountants convention and the company is offering to pay your airline tickets, or gas money, or whatever to get there, and all three of you are going because ALL THREE OF YOU are accountants, then yes, the company can pay for the whole airplane rental.
But if you're Bob from accounting, and the company needs 3 lawyers to go to Orlando to a lawyer convention and you didn't need to go, then the company CAN'T rent a plane and have you fly there, even if they don't pay you anything for the flight.
You mean like Trump has a plan to have Mexico pay for the wall? :)
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Bernie is kidding himself if he thinks that will be easy or simple.
Now I will say, we COULD have free college in this country, if we wanted to, but not using the current system. Too much "for profit" in the system. Same reason Obamacare doesn't work.
Anyway, whatever. Install Linux, that's your only long term fix.
No, there is another... Upgrade to Windows 10...
You may not want to, but it is in fact a long term fix...
Yeah, and what he'll do is expand it. Trump loves the whole H-1B idea, and he's said so repeatedly.
Maybe, maybe not... I honestly have no idea what he'll do, because he talks out of both sides of his mouth too much...
I know Hillary won't change it, that's for sure.
Shame Bernie isn't running against Trump, now THAT would be interesting...
No, he cannot. He can pay a share of the costs, but not all of them. The reasoning behind that includes the fact that being able to log hours as PIC is a benefit to the pilot, and so is "remuneration" in part for the flight.
In short, if you're flying your friend to go fishing, you better be going fishing as well.
I don't understand why people don't just walk.
What's one's dignity worth?
Dignity doesn't pay the mortgage...
Which is why Trump has his name brand shirts made in Mexico and his other products are made in China.
Again, you're missing the point...
People support Trump because he SAYS he'll do something about it. I have no idea if he will, and it may not even matter.
Bernie is telling everyone, "free everything", and he couldn't do that either, even if he wanted to.
People are clearly unhappy, and for good reason.
Profit is nice, but is that what we want our society to be all about? If not, then we need to change the rules.
..Is that the company's sales are up 15% from 2015, and "represents the 10th consecutive year of record results".
Greedy bastards, plain and simple.
Keep in mind they are just playing by the rules of the game.
The real problem is the rules, not the players.
Change the rules...
Now you may or may not think Trump will DO anything about it, that is a separate topic...
But a whole lot of people are tired of this and Trump keeps saying he'll do something about it.
At the end of the day, "Acting Presidential" is less important to the average person than not having their job outsourced overseas.
The FAA was right here, assuming you care about the law. Now we can discuss if the law is wrong (in some ways I'd agree it is), but that isn't the FAA's job, to decide if it is right or wrong.
Flytenow got it wrong by thinking that a lack of profit means there is no "common carriage". That isn't how it works.
You don't have to make a profit, or even have the goal of profit, from the FAA's point of view.
Non-pilots will have trouble with this one, and even many pilots get it wrong. I had many debates with new pilots and even new flight instructors who wanted to read into the FAA regs what they WANTED to read.
If you are flying someone somewhere that you really don't know, and they so much as buy you lunch, it is common carriage and thus illegal without an air carrier certificate. In fact, lunch isn't even required, because they consider "quid pro quo" to be compensation.
Now you don't have to AGREE with this, but arguing with the FAA is like arguing with the cops when they pull you over for a speeding ticket. Pointless and a bad idea.
The FAA takes a VERY narrow view on this topic and it would take an act of Congress to change it.
---
Note: I actually DON'T agree with the FAA here, I'm not defending them, but they are correct according to the rules as THEY see it, and right now the FAA is largely the final decider here. (beyond the appeals courts which is expensive and fails more often than it works, but it does sometimes)
---
Source: My over 10 years in aviation, including running a Part 135 on-demand air carrier as well as working for another one as a pilot, plus my owning a half dozen aircraft some used for commercial operations.
Will they also replace the single employee that covers pretty much the entire sales floor with custom Cortana based customer service bots?
http://www.kurzweilai.net/imag...
Unless the explosion causes fission and breaks it all back apart...
I make no claims to understanding it, nor does it really matter in our lifetime, or even our civilization's likely lifetime. :)
And yes, you're right, if solar is renewable, then so is oil! :)
But again, it doesn't matter, the sun keeps running if we use it or not, so we might as well use it.
Are there any energy sources that you consider to be renewable that are not ultimately fueled by sunlight?
Gravity...
One day, we'll likely invent gravity electric generators that somehow use gravity to make power.
How? I have no idea, but that won't be sunlight based.
Black Holes might be another interesting power source.
Not immediately. But if you shutdown the inverters, the voltage builds up in the cells until the backflow of electrons cancels out the solar induced flux, generating heat. Hotter cells have a shorter lifetime.
Plastic tarps over the panels?
The sun isn't renewable, but it will last long enough that we really don't have to worry about it for now.
Also consider that using solar energy or not, the sun will keep burning (fusing really, but whatever) anyway so we're not wasting it by using it.
And you're mistaken, something does reset the sun... when it explodes... but that won't do Earth much good. :)
If no one is in front of you, perhaps... what if 3 people are in front of you?
Sell 500,000 of these things and suddenly you'll need 20 times the locations to charge.
The irony is that I am neither, rather I think you're the stupid one.
How would a 2016 Honda civic do in a wreck with a modern truck?
Much better than a 2003 Honda Civic would...
:) This is SlashDot, how dare you make a reasonable and thoughtful reply, what kind of web site do you think this is! :)
Actually, your points are all fair ones, I have nothing to add, other than to say I understand... I just don't think Apple is going to change course.
Given time, the issues will go away, much like the loss of floppy drives, then optical drives, has stopped being an issue.
But there will be a transition period, and not everyone will be happy with that.
Firmware doesn't get updated every week... and even then it takes 5-10 min...
If your SB takes 30 min each week to run Windows update, blah...
Factor in that some updates have broken my machine and were automatically backed out (and re-installed, and backed out), and that Windows will sometimes meditate for an hour or three before getting its update lists and another hour or three before performing the updates I permitted - I spend far more time administering the beast than using it.
That tells me that it is time for a clean install of Windows 7 for you...
Either that, or something is wrong with the hardware...
I do this for a living, I've installed Windows 7, 8, 8.1, and 10 on a lot of different machines, ranging from brand new to 10 years old.
Windows is not broken, it works amazingly well, but it doesn't tolerate a broken install or flaky hardware.
The bug where Windows 7 says that the network cable has been pulled, the one where you have to remove the power cord for 20-30 minutes? Seen that.
I haven't, do you have a link?
If the apartment complex changes it's leasing terms, you pretty much can get out of your lease instantly, as the original contract you signed is now invalid.
It depends on where you live of course, but in general, the apartment complex CAN'T change its leasing terms, and you DO have the right to keep living there.
You don't have to move, that would be a burden on you.
The complex simply can't change the terms, and you have the right to live there peacefully without harassment.
Tennant laws exist for a reason, you may be a "renter", but you have rights. Don't become a landlord without understanding the laws for tennants, you HAVE to follow them or you'll be out a LOT of money.
So if some guy gets caught parking his van behind an elementary school, and he's got duck tape, a bed and a puppy in back, you're just going to say, "No story here" because the cops make him move along?
Exactly... A Judge will say, "means, motive, and opportunity..."
The means and opportunity were there, so what is the motive?
He would have a tough defense unless he can afford to hire a good lawyer.
0/10 - Would not read again, bad troll attempt