Not to mention that destroying a nuke over a populated area still lets it do significant damage in the long term.
Maybe it does, and maybe it doesn't. These nukes have a lot of safety features packed into them. You certainly wouldn't want it to do a high atmosphere detonation because its EMP will have far reaching effects (satellites could be destroyed), and because it may cause a chain reaction with other missiles in the general vicinity. The worst case is that it may rain down some fissionable materials over who knows where. Its unlikely to cause a detonation, especially since these detonations have to be very controlled to create fission.
If you can demonstrate that the police willfully and wantonly violated your constitutional rights, you may be able to sue for financial compensation. You typically sue the government that hired the police officers, the department that was supposed to be monitoring the officers, and the officers themselves. Typically you sue for harassment, defamation of character, and the violation of the rights themselves. There are few times when you are even legally able to sue the government, but in this case its a good thing. Of course there have been people that sue the police for things that you and I may consider asinine, but no system is perfect.
Unlimited data, text, phone calls in FL for $45 a month on an iPhone, with unlimited text, data, and phone calls on an iPad as well (well if they let you use the iPad to make calls. There's no reason it can't! The iPad2 can be used to make calls!) for an additional $30. Well really my work pays for both, but they are on my personal account.
I have a brother who is somewhat involved in the cell industry. He says that text messages use the voice channel, and that is why they are not included in "Unlimited data" packages. He also indicates that the equipment to include SMS was separate from the rest of the cell hardware. Now they use SMS to notify the phone when it has voicemail, and they only let you send SMS when the network isn't doing anything significant anyway. So really the cost of a text message now is almost $0.00 for the company. They charge what they do because people will pay it.
I don't know. I know if I had so many first edition books that I could not keep track of, I would be dying to attach all the bar codes, QR codes, RFID chips and NFC chips I could. Who cares how that will mar the books? If I wanted a pristine, mint condition book, I'd get the 5th edition print copy brand new at Barnes And Nobles or Amazon. These old books don't deserve to be treated with the kind of respect and reverence your post seems to suggest.
Sounds like you have one of their older routers, or is one of the newer N capable routers? I had one of the old school G routers and it was wonderful for the longest time (with DD-WRT). I use a Buffalo router to handle my wired network and my network/firewall settings that most routers don't expose. Hopefully it will last a long time. Like I said, the WiFi on it is terrible.
I don't know which Buffalo router you have but the one I have was terrible with DD-WRT. I had to TFTP it back to the Buffalo customized DD-WRT because the community stuff had unreliable WiFi, reboot issues, and other problems. Turns out that the WiFi on the router is terrible, stopped working after 6 months and I ended up getting a more expensive router just to use for WiFi. I used to love Buffalo, and now the only thing I like about them is the ability to get the power of DD-WRT without having to go thru TFTP hassles.
I think most large emergency response teams now use an encrypted radio w/ hopsets configured. Like the military gear, it jumps channels very rapidly. It makes the signal very difficult to jam. You would have to block out a wide swath of frequency to do so effectively. I know that major cities in California started making the switch back in 2005. I would expect any major city in the US to have already switched by now.
AT&T Android phones do have "Install From Untrusted Sources" disabled and AFAIK the only way to enable is to root. This could have changed, but was definitely the case for my brother's Atrix when he got it.
First, in the summary you forget to identify the distance: 100ly. Well, that pretty much rules out any worry of a collision even if at such a distance the alignment would be astronomically unlikely to be one which would allow for a collision.
I can't believe you are doubting the Mayans. You watch, that planet will move those 100 light years faster than you can blink. Dec 21 is only a month away!
How is a civil judgement any better than a guilty/not-guilty verdict? You could potentially face civil damages that would ruin the rest of your life. In the case of OJ Simpson, you have the cloud of "He definitely murdered his wife, or he wouldn't have been found guilty of the civil charges." Maybe OJ did it, and maybe he didn't. But his life is forever ruined by that jury verdict (though lets be honest it was probably ruined as soon as they arrested him, since it was so high profile). The point is that people often use civil verdicts to imply guilt in a criminal matter that was not successfully prosecuted. The fines can be very burdensome. This person wasn't just random joe-blow on the jury. It was the foreperson, the person that the majority of the jurors best fit to handle the case. He can easily manipulate the outcome of the entire trial. One bad apple spoils the barrel. I'd rather see the entire case retried than to see someone receive a judgement in a case of obvious misconduct. It's only fair, and if it were your life and finances on the line, you would agree.
I run my own mail server to back up the mail going to my main domain. Everything is automatically forwarded to my server and I can log into it from anywhere and look for that old message from forever ago. Its easier than doing so with my hosting provider, and I control the up-time and reliability on it. But the main reason I run the server at all is for CalDav and CardDav. Sure no one cares about my mail, but Gmail does read through my messages, contacts and calendar info to serve ads. I don't particularly care to give out all my contact and calendar info to Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, or anyone else. It runs on a very low power (~8W box) that I have running all the time anyway, so why not feel like I have some semblance of privacy?
No but the point he is trying to make, I think, is that you need all those roads and other things you spend blue money on to get goods from one blue state to another. Sure in the northeast all of the states are considered blue, but I bet goods still pass through plenty of red space. Look at California, most goods pass in and out of the state through I-5, CA-99, and I-15. All of which go through red counties (I-5 and CA-99 are red most for hundreds of miles in CA). Urbanized areas are always blue, in my experience. Even if you wanted to carve out most of the red, you'd find that rural areas of almost every single state would disappear.
Because, the bigger the server population, the easier it is to find groups for quests, instances, etc. I know you can do instances w/ others from other servers now, but it still makes the server feel more alive, magical, and interesting. You wouldn't play if there were only 10 people connected to your server at once. Part of the draw of WoW is the socialization while playing.
I can't imagine why anyone would want to partake of a game through twitter. I suppose if you're a die hard fan and you are in the car, can't get it on the radio, and go to twitter to see play by plays. But in those cases I usually go to ESPN and watch their real time game tracker. Its not all that exciting, but you can see what's going on. I guess I just get the Twitheads.
I've never had that after sleeping. I find that nothing makes a thought clearer than a long, hot shower. I often have epiphanies while in the shower (oh god please don't take this the wrong way). Sometimes walking works, so long as I put some music on or anything else to distract my mind. It seems to me like sometimes focusing on the problem blinds you to potential solutions. It's not until after the problem is in your peripheral vision that you see the big picture.
Even the list of medical services that the healthcare bill provides or does not provide will be longer. You cannot leave those decisions to bureaucrats for obvious reasons, and you cannot pay for every medical procedure known to man (cosmetic, lifestyle, etc.)
No you would never leave that to a bunch of bureaucrats, or even legislators. The list of medical procedures covered should be those deemed medically necessary, or appropriate by an elected board of medical doctors. I don't trust that to be codified either. What if some new procedure comes up that saves lives, do we have to wait for a new law to be passed to start using it? That doesn't make any sense either. You could certainly set up the guidelines for said board on a single page, and that could be a separate law from the actual health care granting bill
You already know what laws are important your government, any law that increases their power and authority, or helps ensure they are reelected.
"Members of the Parliament, today we vote on the package of old laws that need renewal. There are 10231 laws in this package. Please vote when ready, but don't take too long - there is another package like that coming up tomorrow. Our job security has never been better!"
That is why you require them to vote on the laws one at a time. They will only re-enact the laws that they really find to be important.
Vague laws give too much leeway to prosecutors and judges. Overly complex laws give advantage to the crooks and tax cheats. Nobody in the government wants to change that.
So you think that a 1000 page health care bill is not only practical but beneficial to the people? I think you can easily spell out the rules for a law in 1 page. If not, your law is likely riddled with pork and political BS instead of being straight to the point. Clear and concise. If you look at the US Civil Code, or even Criminal code most of the sections are relatively short. Would I consider the civil code to be a single law? No. It's a book of laws. The parts of the civil code that are longer than a page are often very complex and more confusing than they should be. Lawyers can have difficulty understanding the nuances of the language. Its like they think that confusing laws will keep them rich and powerful. But no, there will always be need for lawyers, even with simple laws. They will still be experts in case law, procedure, and things like that.
Whether or not they presented a significant danger, I'd be willing to bet that them throwing it at a person on stage is 100% within the definition of (attempted?) assault, and rightfully so. What if they had overthrown it and caught the guy's suit on fire? If you want to burn flags and yellow ribbons, fine. I don't agree with it but you're within your right. If you want to throw a burning object at someone, you can spend all day in the county jail as far as I am concerned. Doesn't matter if you fell short by several feet, you could seriously hurt that person or other bystanders. The Supreme Court has ruled that burning things like the US flag is perfectly legal (granted that was in 1989). In the case they ruled upon, they said it was okay to openly burn a flag doused in Kerosene, on the street. But I bet they would uphold a verdict against someone who threw a burning flag at a person.
Burning the poppy is probably equivalent of the Westboro baptists "Thank God for dead soldiers" posters in terms of disrespect, upset to service family members, etc
How about burning a yellow ribbon? anyone ever get arrested for that in the USA? (answer, yes (first result))
I don't believe they were arrested for burning the yellow ribbon, I believe they were arrested for chucking a burning object at a stage. If they had burned it safely, I don't think there would have been any issue. And by burn it safely, I don't mean burn it in a crowd of people either.
Oh we should certainly ignore laws that are unjust. Then the police should arrest us. Then we should go to court. There the law should be exposed as unjust, and overturned.
I don't think it's right to have a load of laws on the statute book which are just informally ignored. As long as they remain on the books, they retain the potential to be abused one day.
The correct way to handle that is through legislation / constitutional amendments. I believe that all laws should automatically have a 10, 20, or 40 year sunset clause (depending on the severity of the law). If the law isn't important enough to re-enact, then it is not important enough to have in the books. Of course, I also think that laws should be limited to a single 8.5x11" piece of paper, with a 16 point font. There is no point in having laws so complex that no one can understand all the nuances of the law.
So that's the legal justification for arresting him.
I think it's an unjust law -- I believe in free speech -- but it's the police's job to uphold the law as it's written, not how it *should* be written.
I disagree with you. I think its the responsibility of any good citizen to ignore laws that are not just, fair, or in line with the Constitution, the Magna Carta, or etc. In fact, even if its legal within your constitution, it does not mean that it is just for right. If the people of the Civil Rights movement agreed with you, we would still have black people riding in the back of the bus in the US.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention that destroying a nuke over a populated area still lets it do significant damage in the long term.
Maybe it does, and maybe it doesn't. These nukes have a lot of safety features packed into them. You certainly wouldn't want it to do a high atmosphere detonation because its EMP will have far reaching effects (satellites could be destroyed), and because it may cause a chain reaction with other missiles in the general vicinity. The worst case is that it may rain down some fissionable materials over who knows where. Its unlikely to cause a detonation, especially since these detonations have to be very controlled to create fission.
If you can demonstrate that the police willfully and wantonly violated your constitutional rights, you may be able to sue for financial compensation. You typically sue the government that hired the police officers, the department that was supposed to be monitoring the officers, and the officers themselves. Typically you sue for harassment, defamation of character, and the violation of the rights themselves. There are few times when you are even legally able to sue the government, but in this case its a good thing. Of course there have been people that sue the police for things that you and I may consider asinine, but no system is perfect.
Unlimited data, text, phone calls in FL for $45 a month on an iPhone, with unlimited text, data, and phone calls on an iPad as well (well if they let you use the iPad to make calls. There's no reason it can't! The iPad2 can be used to make calls!) for an additional $30. Well really my work pays for both, but they are on my personal account.
Bimbo is a huge brand. They sell Bimbo brand bread all over the Southern United States, and is pretty much THE brand of baked goods in Latin America.
I have a brother who is somewhat involved in the cell industry. He says that text messages use the voice channel, and that is why they are not included in "Unlimited data" packages. He also indicates that the equipment to include SMS was separate from the rest of the cell hardware. Now they use SMS to notify the phone when it has voicemail, and they only let you send SMS when the network isn't doing anything significant anyway. So really the cost of a text message now is almost $0.00 for the company. They charge what they do because people will pay it.
I don't know. I know if I had so many first edition books that I could not keep track of, I would be dying to attach all the bar codes, QR codes, RFID chips and NFC chips I could. Who cares how that will mar the books? If I wanted a pristine, mint condition book, I'd get the 5th edition print copy brand new at Barnes And Nobles or Amazon. These old books don't deserve to be treated with the kind of respect and reverence your post seems to suggest.
Sounds like you have one of their older routers, or is one of the newer N capable routers? I had one of the old school G routers and it was wonderful for the longest time (with DD-WRT). I use a Buffalo router to handle my wired network and my network /firewall settings that most routers don't expose. Hopefully it will last a long time. Like I said, the WiFi on it is terrible.
Yes – they will check. My wife signed us up for a month of the wine club once &ndash
Sounds like you're still enjoying that wine of the month ;)
I don't know which Buffalo router you have but the one I have was terrible with DD-WRT. I had to TFTP it back to the Buffalo customized DD-WRT because the community stuff had unreliable WiFi, reboot issues, and other problems. Turns out that the WiFi on the router is terrible, stopped working after 6 months and I ended up getting a more expensive router just to use for WiFi. I used to love Buffalo, and now the only thing I like about them is the ability to get the power of DD-WRT without having to go thru TFTP hassles.
Epsilons semi-morons. I am sure glad I am not an Alpha.
I think most large emergency response teams now use an encrypted radio w/ hopsets configured. Like the military gear, it jumps channels very rapidly. It makes the signal very difficult to jam. You would have to block out a wide swath of frequency to do so effectively. I know that major cities in California started making the switch back in 2005. I would expect any major city in the US to have already switched by now.
AT&T Android phones do have "Install From Untrusted Sources" disabled and AFAIK the only way to enable is to root. This could have changed, but was definitely the case for my brother's Atrix when he got it.
First, in the summary you forget to identify the distance: 100ly. Well, that pretty much rules out any worry of a collision even if at such a distance the alignment would be astronomically unlikely to be one which would allow for a collision.
I can't believe you are doubting the Mayans. You watch, that planet will move those 100 light years faster than you can blink. Dec 21 is only a month away!
How is a civil judgement any better than a guilty/not-guilty verdict? You could potentially face civil damages that would ruin the rest of your life. In the case of OJ Simpson, you have the cloud of "He definitely murdered his wife, or he wouldn't have been found guilty of the civil charges." Maybe OJ did it, and maybe he didn't. But his life is forever ruined by that jury verdict (though lets be honest it was probably ruined as soon as they arrested him, since it was so high profile). The point is that people often use civil verdicts to imply guilt in a criminal matter that was not successfully prosecuted. The fines can be very burdensome. This person wasn't just random joe-blow on the jury. It was the foreperson, the person that the majority of the jurors best fit to handle the case. He can easily manipulate the outcome of the entire trial. One bad apple spoils the barrel. I'd rather see the entire case retried than to see someone receive a judgement in a case of obvious misconduct. It's only fair, and if it were your life and finances on the line, you would agree.
I run my own mail server to back up the mail going to my main domain. Everything is automatically forwarded to my server and I can log into it from anywhere and look for that old message from forever ago. Its easier than doing so with my hosting provider, and I control the up-time and reliability on it. But the main reason I run the server at all is for CalDav and CardDav. Sure no one cares about my mail, but Gmail does read through my messages, contacts and calendar info to serve ads. I don't particularly care to give out all my contact and calendar info to Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, or anyone else. It runs on a very low power (~8W box) that I have running all the time anyway, so why not feel like I have some semblance of privacy?
No but the point he is trying to make, I think, is that you need all those roads and other things you spend blue money on to get goods from one blue state to another. Sure in the northeast all of the states are considered blue, but I bet goods still pass through plenty of red space. Look at California, most goods pass in and out of the state through I-5, CA-99, and I-15. All of which go through red counties (I-5 and CA-99 are red most for hundreds of miles in CA). Urbanized areas are always blue, in my experience. Even if you wanted to carve out most of the red, you'd find that rural areas of almost every single state would disappear.
Because, the bigger the server population, the easier it is to find groups for quests, instances, etc. I know you can do instances w/ others from other servers now, but it still makes the server feel more alive, magical, and interesting. You wouldn't play if there were only 10 people connected to your server at once. Part of the draw of WoW is the socialization while playing.
I can't imagine why anyone would want to partake of a game through twitter. I suppose if you're a die hard fan and you are in the car, can't get it on the radio, and go to twitter to see play by plays. But in those cases I usually go to ESPN and watch their real time game tracker. Its not all that exciting, but you can see what's going on. I guess I just get the Twitheads.
I've never had that after sleeping. I find that nothing makes a thought clearer than a long, hot shower. I often have epiphanies while in the shower (oh god please don't take this the wrong way). Sometimes walking works, so long as I put some music on or anything else to distract my mind. It seems to me like sometimes focusing on the problem blinds you to potential solutions. It's not until after the problem is in your peripheral vision that you see the big picture.
Even the list of medical services that the healthcare bill provides or does not provide will be longer. You cannot leave those decisions to bureaucrats for obvious reasons, and you cannot pay for every medical procedure known to man (cosmetic, lifestyle, etc.)
No you would never leave that to a bunch of bureaucrats, or even legislators. The list of medical procedures covered should be those deemed medically necessary, or appropriate by an elected board of medical doctors. I don't trust that to be codified either. What if some new procedure comes up that saves lives, do we have to wait for a new law to be passed to start using it? That doesn't make any sense either. You could certainly set up the guidelines for said board on a single page, and that could be a separate law from the actual health care granting bill
You already know what laws are important your government, any law that increases their power and authority, or helps ensure they are reelected.
"Members of the Parliament, today we vote on the package of old laws that need renewal. There are 10231 laws in this package. Please vote when ready, but don't take too long - there is another package like that coming up tomorrow. Our job security has never been better!"
That is why you require them to vote on the laws one at a time. They will only re-enact the laws that they really find to be important.
Vague laws give too much leeway to prosecutors and judges. Overly complex laws give advantage to the crooks and tax cheats. Nobody in the government wants to change that.
So you think that a 1000 page health care bill is not only practical but beneficial to the people? I think you can easily spell out the rules for a law in 1 page. If not, your law is likely riddled with pork and political BS instead of being straight to the point. Clear and concise. If you look at the US Civil Code, or even Criminal code most of the sections are relatively short. Would I consider the civil code to be a single law? No. It's a book of laws. The parts of the civil code that are longer than a page are often very complex and more confusing than they should be. Lawyers can have difficulty understanding the nuances of the language. Its like they think that confusing laws will keep them rich and powerful. But no, there will always be need for lawyers, even with simple laws. They will still be experts in case law, procedure, and things like that.
Whether or not they presented a significant danger, I'd be willing to bet that them throwing it at a person on stage is 100% within the definition of (attempted?) assault, and rightfully so. What if they had overthrown it and caught the guy's suit on fire? If you want to burn flags and yellow ribbons, fine. I don't agree with it but you're within your right. If you want to throw a burning object at someone, you can spend all day in the county jail as far as I am concerned. Doesn't matter if you fell short by several feet, you could seriously hurt that person or other bystanders. The Supreme Court has ruled that burning things like the US flag is perfectly legal (granted that was in 1989). In the case they ruled upon, they said it was okay to openly burn a flag doused in Kerosene, on the street. But I bet they would uphold a verdict against someone who threw a burning flag at a person.
Burning the poppy is probably equivalent of the Westboro baptists "Thank God for dead soldiers" posters in terms of disrespect, upset to service family members, etc
How about burning a yellow ribbon? anyone ever get arrested for that in the USA? (answer, yes (first result))
I don't believe they were arrested for burning the yellow ribbon, I believe they were arrested for chucking a burning object at a stage. If they had burned it safely, I don't think there would have been any issue. And by burn it safely, I don't mean burn it in a crowd of people either.
Oh we should certainly ignore laws that are unjust. Then the police should arrest us. Then we should go to court. There the law should be exposed as unjust, and overturned.
I don't think it's right to have a load of laws on the statute book which are just informally ignored. As long as they remain on the books, they retain the potential to be abused one day.
The correct way to handle that is through legislation / constitutional amendments. I believe that all laws should automatically have a 10, 20, or 40 year sunset clause (depending on the severity of the law). If the law isn't important enough to re-enact, then it is not important enough to have in the books. Of course, I also think that laws should be limited to a single 8.5x11" piece of paper, with a 16 point font. There is no point in having laws so complex that no one can understand all the nuances of the law.
So that's the legal justification for arresting him.
I think it's an unjust law -- I believe in free speech -- but it's the police's job to uphold the law as it's written, not how it *should* be written.
I disagree with you. I think its the responsibility of any good citizen to ignore laws that are not just, fair, or in line with the Constitution, the Magna Carta, or etc. In fact, even if its legal within your constitution, it does not mean that it is just for right. If the people of the Civil Rights movement agreed with you, we would still have black people riding in the back of the bus in the US.