There's also always the option to shelter the berm(put a roof over it), and while it's a more expensive option, scoop it up and put some sort of collector under it like what they use to keep garbage dumps from leeching.
My country has no firearm ownership and crime rates are a tiny fraction of the US. So OBVIOUSLY other factors are at work. Flame on.
Before I get to the flaming, I have one question: Which country is 'yours'? Hard to verify information that you don't give. English usage is good and seems American. Canada?
Why were they so high though? As others mentioned, scraping the first foot or so off the berm and for a range with as many rounds in it as a military range would get should produce enough recyclable material to pay for the scrape.
Or were they requiring stupidly high standards of 'clean up' that raises expenses an OOM or so?
I've seen stuff that says that lead contamination from piping is a lot less than people think. Especially if it's 'just' the solder. Actually, the older the piping, the better, since lead, like copper, oxidizes into a hard coating, unlike iron with relatively flaky rust. Add things like calcium deposits on top, and the contamination goes down.
It's my understanding that there are still lead service lines around. Thing is, unlike household water pipes: 1. They're pretty much always cold (less uptake if cold). 2. Water generally doesn't sit in them (less uptake due to less contact with lead) 3. Larger diameter pipes (less surface area of lead per volume of water) 4. Generally older than heck (lots and lots of buildup keeping elemental lead out of contact).
And while I understand not all pro-gun people are rabid GOP deniers of [insert topic they don't like], it's a pretty good correlation.
Are you sure about that?
When I worked on the design for my 'dream house' firing range I settled on a metal bullet trap; can also be known as a 'spiral decelerator'. The idea is that unless you're really screwing up, the bullet coming in never impacts at more than a 30 degree angle, causing deflection rather than shattering and such. The round then impacts as many times as it needs to in order to bleed off enough energy that it eventually falls into a tray.
With such a system you don't want to fire soft lead; full or total metal jacket is prefered, though most hollowpoints will work as well. Though now I'm also looking at granular systems - uses a deep collection of rubber granules under a 'self healing' rubber mat to contain the bullets, for the most part completely intact(good for an indoor range).
Personally, while I agree that leaded gasoline was probably the cause for most of the crime spike around the '80s, much like Thiomersal, or the fact that sodium and chlorine are very nasty chemicals if separate but a life necessity when together, the FORM the lead takes is important. Different forms have different amounts of uptake. It becomes a question of cost/benefit.
If you're not a professional shooter you're probably not going to get enough lead to cause damage from shooting unless you also have other factors contributing to exposure.
I figure that inhalation of lead probably has a very high intake factor, while just touching it in elemental, solid form is very low. Lower still if it's jacketed. You normally discard meat around the bullet impact anyways when you hunt, and modern hunting rounds should be designed to minimize fragmentation. You still have a lot less surface area than with pellets, and part of the problem was birds swallowing pellets for use in their gizzards.
Unless you're crazy with the photos or are a professional 'most' SSDs will be plenty large enough. It's Video (and games) that exceed most HD's.
You're still going to see HD's in most things until Flash is cheaper for what the 'average' user needs/wants. One thing to remember is that at this point that there's a price floor for HD's. Such low end devices are more expensive per GB than the larger HDs because the mechanicals impose a certain minimum cost.
We're getting closer, but for power users on a budget like me... They have a while to go.
My first thought was that they make FHD (1920x1080) LCD projectors that have a LCD screen of about 1" providing their display.
Well, the AC said 39 microns, unsourced. I found a source. Then found another that says 15.
Making it bigger while keeping the panel that small(IE increasing overall resolution) might eventually be a problem, but given what I'm seeing going 'retina' even with desktop/laptop monitors(my biggest remaining resolution gripe) should be readily possible.
Accident mechanics can be weird, the difference in labor costs between robots in a factor and humans in a repair shop is sufficiently huge that it takes surprisingly little damage today to total a vehicle.
Still, airbags are a surprisingly expensive system to replace - several thousands of dollars for a driver's airbag, for example. It can easily push a vehicle from 'fix' to 'totaled'. It did with my car. The airbag system fix alone was over 50% of the total.
I phrased it poorly - what I meant to say is that regulations concerning headlights, separate from the sealed beam one that eventually went away, has slowed the adoption of LED ones. There's other issues, but the regulations haven't helped.
I know it wasn't an 'avalanche', but it did slow things - they had to kill the regulation before they even started going away from sealed beams. It's sort of like how some local building codes used to specify asphalt shingles of at least X fire grade - asphalt shingles were mandated - no option for shale, tile, metal, etc...
The air bags - pretty much. If the accident had been more violent they probably would have helped; as is I was 'perfectly' safe even without them. Though I'll point out that the current rules say 'airbags!'. It's my understanding that there's no option for a car manufacturer to develop an alternative that creates a car that's as safe or safer than one equipped with airbags. So the regulation isn't agile.
Yes, but oil is a global market. If the Saudis stopped selling, the rest of the world such as Europe, India, and China would have to buy from other sources, sources that we are currently buying from, and it'd drive the price of oil through the roof.
government itself maintaining the roads, the lighting, and the signs
Thus why I don't consider those 'regulations' in the traditional sense. DOT generally makes recommendations, not requirements.
The lighting on the cars themselves is a matter of regulation.
Indeed, but even then I understand it's slowed progress - at one point specific sealed bulb packages were required(only seen on Jeeps today), and it wasn't until that regulation was done away with that we got better aerodynamics(improved mileage), and as I understand it it's slowed the switch to LED lighting, which is actually cheaper/more efficient - generally life of the vehicle, no need to replace.
Surely buckling in should disable the airbag.
Modern multistage airbags do add a substantial amount of safety in a crash today; even(especially) if you're wearing your seatbelt, though the seatbelt itself is still a bigger safety improvement than all the airbags.
I was in a relatively minor accident where between my bracing* and the seatbelt I never touched the airbag, but because it went off my car was totaled.
Ichijo has it - ROI, basically. Thing to remember is that a city/state isn't a business, it IS the government. Regulations are how the government forces businesses and individuals to do things, but things are a lot looser inside.
Most of these things the cities/states are required to do.
Are you sure about this 'requirement'? I'm pretty sure the involved infrastructure departments get to pick where and when. Also, it might surprise you, but in many cases cities today are taking down street lights, putting in timers and such to save power. Lighting technology has advanced, and it turns out some of our lighting is really, really horrid. Though how bad really depends on the designer - Some from the '50s were really efficient about their lighting(especially industrial; street lights have always been highly efficient), some today are horrible light polluters.
Like I said earlier - I ballpark in 50% of regulations. I'll counter with rules such as the one in the state of Texas that requires a Barber be capable of giving a straight razor shave, despite 99% of them never doing it outside of qualification for their license. Requiring a license to cut hair in general(though coloring it is a bit different). One state had one that any place that sells open container alcohol needs to also sell prepared food(so most bars have a crockpot of soup or something).
but is that the best thing our police departments can be doing, investigating and ticketing normal people over stepping on a taxi drivers toes?
By the sounds of it the police aren't doing it; maybe the specific 'airport police' that the airport is paying for. They do specify that they're doing 'citizen's arrests' so they're certainly not official, though I don't understand how they can get court dates without formal police presences.
Of course, it also sucks because traditionally you can't get charged with trespassing without being formally told to leave. Once you're told to leave you have to do so in an expedient manner, but you're allowed to collect your goods and leave in a safe manner.
I know the technology existed, but the one thing the article lacks was 'how much'? Thanks to the regulations today it's actually harder than it should be to tell the safer cars out, but it is one of my shopping points.
Attila (another replyer) made a good point - 'if you can't afford a car w/airbags, you don't get a car'. I can't help but think that all the airbags and extra safety features today are proportionally cheaper.
Driving a cab might not have been a big business where you were, but consider NYC, where a medallion costs well over $1M at this point. The interest on the loan to buy the medallion pretty much dwarfs any other costs -car, gas, etc...
Taxi drivers enjoy legal semi-monopolies. It's sold to the public that it ensures that they will be picked up(despite being black), get a safe vehicle(despite pretty much all vehicles being safe today), with enough legroom and a 'professional' driver.
The problem comes in that, as a consumer, if there's enough taxis they'll have to pick up non-optimal customers(black) anyways, as a consumer I can look at the vehicle and refuse to use it if it's old, dirty, whatever(and being a licensed taxi company doesn't prevent this), and as the complaints elsewhere in the thread show, getting a 'professional' driver is still something of a crapshoot.
Ergo I see the regulations costing me a lot, but giving me little, thus I object to them.
There are stupid regulations, just like there are stupid laws, but the exceptions should be dealt with rather than throwing the whole system out.
Your quoting airbags reminded me - the first generation of airbags were dictated by the government to be set up to do a lick of good for an unbuckled passanger. As a result they detonated with such force they killed lighter people (children and small females).
Is the street lighting, road markings, and junctions a result of regulations or industry 'best practices'?
I'd place 'good' regulations at closer to 50%, but there's a lot of inertia - said regulations make it hard to build a non-traditional house, for example. The house itself might be cheaper, safer, more energy efficient, but it's not standard, ergo not planned for and they won't approve it. Most non-traditional houses have to be built out in unincorporated areas because of this.
If publishers were as routine about jacking up the prices in Europe and/or Canada, I'd understand more. As it seems to be mostly restricted to Australia, I can't help but think it's something unique about Australia. You understand?
most of which were meaningless and of no importance,
Indeed, I remember one of the classified cables was basically 'Person X is important. Yes, he smells of untreated sewage, Despite this treat him with politeness, respect, yada yada yada...
So, harmful if it gets out to said individual, which is why it was classified confidential, but otherwise no big deal.
Actually, the 'tribunal' part would be his choice. For charges of this seriousness it would be a 'general court martial' where he is indeed guaranteed a jury of his peers if he so chose - other military members being considered his 'peers'.
You have a moral human duty, as determined by international courts even , to not be complicit in the slaughter of civilians.
The vast majority of Manning's released documents weren't about the 'slaughter of civilians' though. Also, like it or not, per the Law of Armed Conflict it's fully legal to slaughter civilians in military conflict as long as it's not deliberate. As long as it was truly accidental or 'collateral damage' it's allowed.
Because the AC misunderstood: All actions I referred to are technically 100% legal. There are illegal methods available, but with the assistance of lawyers and accountants it's possible to move yourself AND your wealth to another country 100% legally excepting the occasional paperwork snafu that's the equivalent of 'Your handrail is 1/2" too high/too low".
I tend to use the terms "Tax Evasion" to mean illegally evading taxes, with "Tax Avoidance" to be the completely legal equivalent, deliberately shaping your income/investments to minimize tax liability.
In the USA you don't actually have that much wealth transfer to avoid taxes because 15% is already far lower than most of the rest of the world. There's some evasion, of course, but with the cracking of the Swiss they've lost a major shelter.
I can import games from the UK, Asia or the US. In fact I regularly do
Are you doing this as a consumer or as a retailer? Are you buying them for further distribution?
It's the publishers who say Australians aren't permitted to pay the same as Americans or English.
Are you sure that the publishers aren't being partially held over the barrel by distributer X in Australia who wants a larger than normal cut and a set of restrictive policies that result in the publisher raising the price rather than eating the costs? Policies that include 'All other distribution channels have to be at our price or higher'?
A lot of indie games are purely electronic distributed, don't have a physical media distribution channel to worry about, and thus don't have to worry about distributer X.
When you use the public airwaves, you have to follow the government's rules. Always part of those rules is your service fulfilling some form of public interest. With TV, this means a certain number of hours of children programming, regular news programming, and some emergency news and emergency alert capabilities.
True, but that's government requirements, which you need to meet irregardless of the reason why you own the station. Indeed, motivation for radio stations remains the same - profit, not some 'public interest' bull.
Now you want a different reason? Due to new restrictions on lobbying the NRA was looking at buying a radio station in order to make themselves a 'news organization' and allow them to publish their advertising as 'news'. The restrictions ended up being shot down by the courts(free speech, you know?) so the NRA didn't go through with it, but they were looking into it.
Clear Channel got in trouble a while back because their highly automated operations meant no-one was around to answer the phone at a local radio station, so they didn't broadcast the alert the local police wanted to get out to the public, until many hours later. That's the kind of thing that gets broadcasters shut down. That's the kind of thing ASCAP is accusing Pandora *will* do in the future.
I'd argue that, logically speaking, Pandora's radio station would actually be a lot LESS automated by default. The reason being that, owning only ONE radio station, it makes sense to have a local team operating it. That would make them far more responsive than clear channel, which entirely automated a number of stations.
Slashdot Mirror
There's also always the option to shelter the berm(put a roof over it), and while it's a more expensive option, scoop it up and put some sort of collector under it like what they use to keep garbage dumps from leeching.
Thousands of scientists: "Wildlife is dying due to poisoning from lead ammunition being accidentally ingested. Here is the evidence."
Do you actually have any studies that say this? Any about wildlife other than waterfowl?
My country has no firearm ownership and crime rates are a tiny fraction of the US. So OBVIOUSLY other factors are at work. Flame on.
Before I get to the flaming, I have one question: Which country is 'yours'? Hard to verify information that you don't give. English usage is good and seems American. Canada?
Why were they so high though? As others mentioned, scraping the first foot or so off the berm and for a range with as many rounds in it as a military range would get should produce enough recyclable material to pay for the scrape.
Or were they requiring stupidly high standards of 'clean up' that raises expenses an OOM or so?
I've seen stuff that says that lead contamination from piping is a lot less than people think. Especially if it's 'just' the solder. Actually, the older the piping, the better, since lead, like copper, oxidizes into a hard coating, unlike iron with relatively flaky rust. Add things like calcium deposits on top, and the contamination goes down.
It's my understanding that there are still lead service lines around. Thing is, unlike household water pipes:
1. They're pretty much always cold (less uptake if cold).
2. Water generally doesn't sit in them (less uptake due to less contact with lead)
3. Larger diameter pipes (less surface area of lead per volume of water)
4. Generally older than heck (lots and lots of buildup keeping elemental lead out of contact).
And while I understand not all pro-gun people are rabid GOP deniers of [insert topic they don't like], it's a pretty good correlation.
Are you sure about that?
When I worked on the design for my 'dream house' firing range I settled on a metal bullet trap; can also be known as a 'spiral decelerator'. The idea is that unless you're really screwing up, the bullet coming in never impacts at more than a 30 degree angle, causing deflection rather than shattering and such. The round then impacts as many times as it needs to in order to bleed off enough energy that it eventually falls into a tray.
With such a system you don't want to fire soft lead; full or total metal jacket is prefered, though most hollowpoints will work as well. Though now I'm also looking at granular systems - uses a deep collection of rubber granules under a 'self healing' rubber mat to contain the bullets, for the most part completely intact(good for an indoor range).
Personally, while I agree that leaded gasoline was probably the cause for most of the crime spike around the '80s, much like Thiomersal, or the fact that sodium and chlorine are very nasty chemicals if separate but a life necessity when together, the FORM the lead takes is important. Different forms have different amounts of uptake. It becomes a question of cost/benefit.
If you're not a professional shooter you're probably not going to get enough lead to cause damage from shooting unless you also have other factors contributing to exposure.
I figure that inhalation of lead probably has a very high intake factor, while just touching it in elemental, solid form is very low. Lower still if it's jacketed. You normally discard meat around the bullet impact anyways when you hunt, and modern hunting rounds should be designed to minimize fragmentation. You still have a lot less surface area than with pellets, and part of the problem was birds swallowing pellets for use in their gizzards.
The issue ends up being complicated.
Unless you're crazy with the photos or are a professional 'most' SSDs will be plenty large enough. It's Video (and games) that exceed most HD's.
You're still going to see HD's in most things until Flash is cheaper for what the 'average' user needs/wants. One thing to remember is that at this point that there's a price floor for HD's. Such low end devices are more expensive per GB than the larger HDs because the mechanicals impose a certain minimum cost.
We're getting closer, but for power users on a budget like me... They have a while to go.
My first thought was that they make FHD (1920x1080) LCD projectors that have a LCD screen of about 1" providing their display.
Well, the AC said 39 microns, unsourced. I found a source. Then found another that says 15.
Making it bigger while keeping the panel that small(IE increasing overall resolution) might eventually be a problem, but given what I'm seeing going 'retina' even with desktop/laptop monitors(my biggest remaining resolution gripe) should be readily possible.
Accident mechanics can be weird, the difference in labor costs between robots in a factor and humans in a repair shop is sufficiently huge that it takes surprisingly little damage today to total a vehicle.
Still, airbags are a surprisingly expensive system to replace - several thousands of dollars for a driver's airbag, for example. It can easily push a vehicle from 'fix' to 'totaled'. It did with my car. The airbag system fix alone was over 50% of the total.
I phrased it poorly - what I meant to say is that regulations concerning headlights, separate from the sealed beam one that eventually went away, has slowed the adoption of LED ones. There's other issues, but the regulations haven't helped.
I know it wasn't an 'avalanche', but it did slow things - they had to kill the regulation before they even started going away from sealed beams. It's sort of like how some local building codes used to specify asphalt shingles of at least X fire grade - asphalt shingles were mandated - no option for shale, tile, metal, etc...
The air bags - pretty much. If the accident had been more violent they probably would have helped; as is I was 'perfectly' safe even without them. Though I'll point out that the current rules say 'airbags!'. It's my understanding that there's no option for a car manufacturer to develop an alternative that creates a car that's as safe or safer than one equipped with airbags. So the regulation isn't agile.
If you're still not having the range/mass of shot necessary to bring down the drone, trade up from your 12 gauge to a punt gun.
Yes, but oil is a global market. If the Saudis stopped selling, the rest of the world such as Europe, India, and China would have to buy from other sources, sources that we are currently buying from, and it'd drive the price of oil through the roof.
government itself maintaining the roads, the lighting, and the signs
Thus why I don't consider those 'regulations' in the traditional sense. DOT generally makes recommendations, not requirements.
The lighting on the cars themselves is a matter of regulation.
Indeed, but even then I understand it's slowed progress - at one point specific sealed bulb packages were required(only seen on Jeeps today), and it wasn't until that regulation was done away with that we got better aerodynamics(improved mileage), and as I understand it it's slowed the switch to LED lighting, which is actually cheaper/more efficient - generally life of the vehicle, no need to replace.
Surely buckling in should disable the airbag.
Modern multistage airbags do add a substantial amount of safety in a crash today; even(especially) if you're wearing your seatbelt, though the seatbelt itself is still a bigger safety improvement than all the airbags.
I was in a relatively minor accident where between my bracing* and the seatbelt I never touched the airbag, but because it went off my car was totaled.
*I remember thinking 'Don't lock my elbows!'
Ichijo has it - ROI, basically. Thing to remember is that a city/state isn't a business, it IS the government. Regulations are how the government forces businesses and individuals to do things, but things are a lot looser inside.
Most of these things the cities/states are required to do.
Are you sure about this 'requirement'? I'm pretty sure the involved infrastructure departments get to pick where and when. Also, it might surprise you, but in many cases cities today are taking down street lights, putting in timers and such to save power. Lighting technology has advanced, and it turns out some of our lighting is really, really horrid. Though how bad really depends on the designer - Some from the '50s were really efficient about their lighting(especially industrial; street lights have always been highly efficient), some today are horrible light polluters.
Like I said earlier - I ballpark in 50% of regulations. I'll counter with rules such as the one in the state of Texas that requires a Barber be capable of giving a straight razor shave, despite 99% of them never doing it outside of qualification for their license. Requiring a license to cut hair in general(though coloring it is a bit different). One state had one that any place that sells open container alcohol needs to also sell prepared food(so most bars have a crockpot of soup or something).
but is that the best thing our police departments can be doing, investigating and ticketing normal people over stepping on a taxi drivers toes?
By the sounds of it the police aren't doing it; maybe the specific 'airport police' that the airport is paying for. They do specify that they're doing 'citizen's arrests' so they're certainly not official, though I don't understand how they can get court dates without formal police presences.
Of course, it also sucks because traditionally you can't get charged with trespassing without being formally told to leave. Once you're told to leave you have to do so in an expedient manner, but you're allowed to collect your goods and leave in a safe manner.
I know the technology existed, but the one thing the article lacks was 'how much'? Thanks to the regulations today it's actually harder than it should be to tell the safer cars out, but it is one of my shopping points.
Attila (another replyer) made a good point - 'if you can't afford a car w/airbags, you don't get a car'. I can't help but think that all the airbags and extra safety features today are proportionally cheaper.
Driving a cab might not have been a big business where you were, but consider NYC, where a medallion costs well over $1M at this point. The interest on the loan to buy the medallion pretty much dwarfs any other costs -car, gas, etc...
Taxi drivers enjoy legal semi-monopolies. It's sold to the public that it ensures that they will be picked up(despite being black), get a safe vehicle(despite pretty much all vehicles being safe today), with enough legroom and a 'professional' driver.
The problem comes in that, as a consumer, if there's enough taxis they'll have to pick up non-optimal customers(black) anyways, as a consumer I can look at the vehicle and refuse to use it if it's old, dirty, whatever(and being a licensed taxi company doesn't prevent this), and as the complaints elsewhere in the thread show, getting a 'professional' driver is still something of a crapshoot.
Ergo I see the regulations costing me a lot, but giving me little, thus I object to them.
There are stupid regulations, just like there are stupid laws, but the exceptions should be dealt with rather than throwing the whole system out.
Your quoting airbags reminded me - the first generation of airbags were dictated by the government to be set up to do a lick of good for an unbuckled passanger. As a result they detonated with such force they killed lighter people (children and small females).
Is the street lighting, road markings, and junctions a result of regulations or industry 'best practices'?
I'd place 'good' regulations at closer to 50%, but there's a lot of inertia - said regulations make it hard to build a non-traditional house, for example. The house itself might be cheaper, safer, more energy efficient, but it's not standard, ergo not planned for and they won't approve it. Most non-traditional houses have to be built out in unincorporated areas because of this.
Just trying to understand what the system is.
If publishers were as routine about jacking up the prices in Europe and/or Canada, I'd understand more. As it seems to be mostly restricted to Australia, I can't help but think it's something unique about Australia. You understand?
What US secrets and concessions did this Administration have to offer the Russians in exchange for that?
Probably a promise to do the same for any Russian operatives who do the reverse. One hand washing the other and all that...
A lot of nations are heavily invested in the status quo - unsolicited releases like Manning/Snowden is disruptive and thus not wanted.
most of which were meaningless and of no importance,
Indeed, I remember one of the classified cables was basically 'Person X is important. Yes, he smells of untreated sewage, Despite this treat him with politeness, respect, yada yada yada...
So, harmful if it gets out to said individual, which is why it was classified confidential, but otherwise no big deal.
Actually, the 'tribunal' part would be his choice. For charges of this seriousness it would be a 'general court martial' where he is indeed guaranteed a jury of his peers if he so chose - other military members being considered his 'peers'.
You have a moral human duty, as determined by international courts even , to not be complicit in the slaughter of civilians.
The vast majority of Manning's released documents weren't about the 'slaughter of civilians' though. Also, like it or not, per the Law of Armed Conflict it's fully legal to slaughter civilians in military conflict as long as it's not deliberate. As long as it was truly accidental or 'collateral damage' it's allowed.
Because the AC misunderstood: All actions I referred to are technically 100% legal. There are illegal methods available, but with the assistance of lawyers and accountants it's possible to move yourself AND your wealth to another country 100% legally excepting the occasional paperwork snafu that's the equivalent of 'Your handrail is 1/2" too high/too low".
I tend to use the terms "Tax Evasion" to mean illegally evading taxes, with "Tax Avoidance" to be the completely legal equivalent, deliberately shaping your income/investments to minimize tax liability.
In the USA you don't actually have that much wealth transfer to avoid taxes because 15% is already far lower than most of the rest of the world. There's some evasion, of course, but with the cracking of the Swiss they've lost a major shelter.
I can import games from the UK, Asia or the US. In fact I regularly do
Are you doing this as a consumer or as a retailer? Are you buying them for further distribution?
It's the publishers who say Australians aren't permitted to pay the same as Americans or English.
Are you sure that the publishers aren't being partially held over the barrel by distributer X in Australia who wants a larger than normal cut and a set of restrictive policies that result in the publisher raising the price rather than eating the costs? Policies that include 'All other distribution channels have to be at our price or higher'?
A lot of indie games are purely electronic distributed, don't have a physical media distribution channel to worry about, and thus don't have to worry about distributer X.
When you use the public airwaves, you have to follow the government's rules. Always part of those rules is your service fulfilling some form of public interest. With TV, this means a certain number of hours of children programming, regular news programming, and some emergency news and emergency alert capabilities.
True, but that's government requirements, which you need to meet irregardless of the reason why you own the station. Indeed, motivation for radio stations remains the same - profit, not some 'public interest' bull.
Now you want a different reason? Due to new restrictions on lobbying the NRA was looking at buying a radio station in order to make themselves a 'news organization' and allow them to publish their advertising as 'news'. The restrictions ended up being shot down by the courts(free speech, you know?) so the NRA didn't go through with it, but they were looking into it.
Clear Channel got in trouble a while back because their highly automated operations meant no-one was around to answer the phone at a local radio station, so they didn't broadcast the alert the local police wanted to get out to the public, until many hours later. That's the kind of thing that gets broadcasters shut down. That's the kind of thing ASCAP is accusing Pandora *will* do in the future.
I'd argue that, logically speaking, Pandora's radio station would actually be a lot LESS automated by default. The reason being that, owning only ONE radio station, it makes sense to have a local team operating it. That would make them far more responsive than clear channel, which entirely automated a number of stations.