We've asked that the candidates
limit their responses to 300 words, and we've given each candidate the opportunity to add one 500-word rebuttal by the end of October 19th. (emphasis mine)
As a corollary, the CIA is formulated to be the country's foremost expert on many of these issues. If we choose to ignore this expert opinion, is it because the CIA is a failed agency? If it is failing, why do you and the rest of the nation nevertheless continue rely on the CIA for many other opinions, many of which affect our safety and security against terrorism, the foremost threat of our time? Why should we continue to maintain and fund the agency? If it is not a failure of an agency, would not the logical course of action at a minimum be to update our beliefs in the face of its evidence?
Many young (and old alike) voters feel disenfranchised by a system that favors two strong parties and restricts the representation of ideologies outside the mainstream. Exasperation over this state of affairs has been exemplified by: a general malaise among would-be voters; major third party candidates that have no realistic chance of success, despite strong popular support and financial backing; and a highly charged polarization of the electorate between Republicans and Democrats, two parties that often espouse similar policies. Do you consider these symptoms indicative of systemic problems? As a presidential candidate, do you believe that our nation needs to adapt our election systems to further our democratic principles, if not, why? What specific systematic changes would you advocate for in our campaign finance system to increase participation by additional parties and individual voters? Would you advocate fundamental changes, such as elimination of the Electoral College, or the adoption of Approval voting or Instant-Runoff voting, or use of proportional representation, to our election system to relieve this perception of disenfranchisement?
By impossible, I assume you mean according to the 2nd law of Thermodynamics (given your reference).
Cold Fusion is simply Fusion at a lower macro-temperature (as in a room-temperature room). Fusion clearly is possible, unless you care to explain atomic weapons, stars, nuclear power another way (do I hear giant government conspiracy maybe? matrix-like pseudo-reality?).
Cold fusion may or may not be possible, but clearly science hasn't proven it either way. And as another form of Fusion, it certainly does not violate the 2nd law.
AFAIK, there are certain things the government can't do, regardless of how helpful they might be. I could swear it says that somewhere.
If you think forcing people to carry IDs is that important, try changing the constitution to allow the government to do so. Good luck, let me know when you are done.
IIRC, it has been read as one of the few meaningful rights in the "privileges and immunities" clause: the right to interstate travel. It has real meaning too: it is what prevents states from charging you taxes upon entering or leaving. Presumably, this includes travel by common and usual means (such as driving and flying); it would become meaningless if it required you to walk to preserve your rights.
If they required ID to fly in a private plane, or ride as a passenger in a auto, I would bitch very loudly.
My father just recently had to pay to have a background check, get finger prints, and all sorts of other obtrusive things to fly his own private plane. Oh, and passengers are required to check in with ID before flying.
I routinely get TWO full length DVDs (just watched LotR:RotK and Lion King two days ago) out of my T40 with extended-life battery. When brand-spanking new, I clocked it at about 8 hours, though it is down to about 6 nowadays. Good thing I have a spare extended-life battery!
Genetic algoroithms are simply another form of optimization algorithm, just like Simulated annealing, Ant-Cology optimization, just to name a few. Each variety has its strengths and weaknesses for different search spaces and genetic algorithms have there place. These often have nature related names because nature is an excellent optimizer from which we draw inspiration.
If you want to talk brute force, try an exhaustive search of complex high-dimension, continous, real valued parameter space. Get back to me when you are done.
Settlements do not have to have anything to do with the merits of the case. Often, the cost of litigation, even of a completely meritless case, is the deciding factor.
Why should patches even require registration or other identification? This requirement could be used in a discriminatory way and hence dissuade users from implementing them. Moreover, I'd like to add an important addition, inspired in part by this comment: patches should not modify the user's rights in any way.
No matter which way you cut it, this is going to be very, very expensive. I won't claim to know how much, but I'll personally wager its upwards of a Trillion USD.
Seriosly, this is a good move for Mozilla; trademarks themselves are valuable, properly nurtured. The Mozilla foundation and the Mozilla's users would certainly like to be able to build value without ever having to sell its core product.
And don't you forget about the poor starving scenery and prop painters sweltering on the city streets!
What will these highly trained painters going to do when the movie industry is destroyed? Go back to painting houses, fences, or other art? Heaven forbid!
Everyone just needs to admit that they want a super extended version. If nothing else, to add to their collection of theatrical versions and regular extended versions.
They will work just fine until the mp3 format license requires the DRM add-ons and players start refusing to play music encoded without the DRM support.
I and about every other lawyer I've ever know would believe that. The powers of the federal government were largely held in check early by the efforts of the states, the immaturity (as in age) of the country and its government, and the desire to hold the union together. The judicial activism activism of the early 20th century and the New-deal era politics were what drastically changed the landscape. And most of this was predicated on a need to suppress post civil war southern states rights, and a revised interpretation of the commerce & necessary and proper clauses, and many other factors, not simply on the doctrine of "compelling state interest". Certainly the federal income tax drastically increased the federal power, though chiefly because it ameliorated the requirement of porportial taxation.
As an aside, the recent ACLU action in the California recall election had promise of becoming the first serious test of the 10th amendment as federal election laws and civil rights legislation conflicted with California's consitution and its fundamental right to conduct elections. Alas, the ACLU decided not to pursue the case to the Supreme Court.
And yes, I carry a West publications copy of the US Constitution everywhere I go, and read it often.
The 10th amendment, for all its powerful language, means essentially nothing. It merely neatly summarizes the concept (embodied in the entire structure of the US) that the national government is one of limited powers, where sovereignty flows from the people to the government, not the other way around. Moreover, its meaning or implications has never been tested or used, and is far to vague to derive any black letter law from, especially on a topic so removed as RIAA antitrust exemptions.
There is quite an outrage here about the difference in cost for textbooks bought in the USA versus those in foreign countries. But at least arbitrage will eventually stop this (assuming Congress or tariffs don't interfere). But an analogous situation prevents this sort of market correction for DVD's: the Region Code system. It is time for equal public attention and outrage against this system, and the DMCA which makes it possible.
Slashdot Mirror
At least we have a start...didn't you see the news?
I think a new "IE" key is in order too.
As a corollary, the CIA is formulated to be the country's foremost expert on many of these issues. If we choose to ignore this expert opinion, is it because the CIA is a failed agency? If it is failing, why do you and the rest of the nation nevertheless continue rely on the CIA for many other opinions, many of which affect our safety and security against terrorism, the foremost threat of our time? Why should we continue to maintain and fund the agency? If it is not a failure of an agency, would not the logical course of action at a minimum be to update our beliefs in the face of its evidence?
Many young (and old alike) voters feel disenfranchised by a system that favors two strong parties and restricts the representation of ideologies outside the mainstream. Exasperation over this state of affairs has been exemplified by: a general malaise among would-be voters; major third party candidates that have no realistic chance of success, despite strong popular support and financial backing; and a highly charged polarization of the electorate between Republicans and Democrats, two parties that often espouse similar policies. Do you consider these symptoms indicative of systemic problems? As a presidential candidate, do you believe that our nation needs to adapt our election systems to further our democratic principles, if not, why? What specific systematic changes would you advocate for in our campaign finance system to increase participation by additional parties and individual voters? Would you advocate fundamental changes, such as elimination of the Electoral College, or the adoption of Approval voting or Instant-Runoff voting, or use of proportional representation, to our election system to relieve this perception of disenfranchisement?
Cold Fusion is simply Fusion at a lower macro-temperature (as in a room-temperature room). Fusion clearly is possible, unless you care to explain atomic weapons, stars, nuclear power another way (do I hear giant government conspiracy maybe? matrix-like pseudo-reality?).
Cold fusion may or may not be possible, but clearly science hasn't proven it either way. And as another form of Fusion, it certainly does not violate the 2nd law.
It's:
If you think forcing people to carry IDs is that important, try changing the constitution to allow the government to do so. Good luck, let me know when you are done.
IIRC, it has been read as one of the few meaningful rights in the "privileges and immunities" clause: the right to interstate travel. It has real meaning too: it is what prevents states from charging you taxes upon entering or leaving. Presumably, this includes travel by common and usual means (such as driving and flying); it would become meaningless if it required you to walk to preserve your rights.
My father just recently had to pay to have a background check, get finger prints, and all sorts of other obtrusive things to fly his own private plane. Oh, and passengers are required to check in with ID before flying.
I routinely get TWO full length DVDs (just watched LotR:RotK and Lion King two days ago) out of my T40 with extended-life battery. When brand-spanking new, I clocked it at about 8 hours, though it is down to about 6 nowadays. Good thing I have a spare extended-life battery!
Note that government regulation sometimes helps competition, sometimes hurts. We have been doing a bad job of choosing when and what to regulate.
Genetic algoroithms are simply another form of optimization algorithm, just like Simulated annealing, Ant-Cology optimization, just to name a few. Each variety has its strengths and weaknesses for different search spaces and genetic algorithms have there place. These often have nature related names because nature is an excellent optimizer from which we draw inspiration.
If you want to talk brute force, try an exhaustive search of complex high-dimension, continous, real valued parameter space. Get back to me when you are done.
Settlements do not have to have anything to do with the merits of the case. Often, the cost of litigation, even of a completely meritless case, is the deciding factor.
Why should patches even require registration or other identification? This requirement could be used in a discriminatory way and hence dissuade users from implementing them. Moreover, I'd like to add an important addition, inspired in part by this comment: patches should not modify the user's rights in any way.
No matter which way you cut it, this is going to be very, very expensive. I won't claim to know how much, but I'll personally wager its upwards of a Trillion USD.
The first patentable business method on slashdot:
1. Write kick-a$!$# software
2. Give away core product(s)
3. Develop strong trademark
4. Profit!!
Seriosly, this is a good move for Mozilla; trademarks themselves are valuable, properly nurtured. The Mozilla foundation and the Mozilla's users would certainly like to be able to build value without ever having to sell its core product.
And don't you forget about the poor starving scenery and prop painters sweltering on the city streets!
What will these highly trained painters going to do when the movie industry is destroyed? Go back to painting houses, fences, or other art? Heaven forbid!
Everyone just needs to admit that they want a super extended version. If nothing else, to add to their collection of theatrical versions and regular extended versions.
I know I do.
They will work just fine until the mp3 format license requires the DRM add-ons and players start refusing to play music encoded without the DRM support.
IRV is broken. Approval Voting is much better, see this approval voting web site.
Oddly, the federal highway / road system was originally predicated on Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 ("To establish Post Offices and post Roads;").
I and about every other lawyer I've ever know would believe that. The powers of the federal government were largely held in check early by the efforts of the states, the immaturity (as in age) of the country and its government, and the desire to hold the union together. The judicial activism activism of the early 20th century and the New-deal era politics were what drastically changed the landscape. And most of this was predicated on a need to suppress post civil war southern states rights, and a revised interpretation of the commerce & necessary and proper clauses, and many other factors, not simply on the doctrine of "compelling state interest". Certainly the federal income tax drastically increased the federal power, though chiefly because it ameliorated the requirement of porportial taxation.
As an aside, the recent ACLU action in the California recall election had promise of becoming the first serious test of the 10th amendment as federal election laws and civil rights legislation conflicted with California's consitution and its fundamental right to conduct elections. Alas, the ACLU decided not to pursue the case to the Supreme Court.
And yes, I carry a West publications copy of the US Constitution everywhere I go, and read it often.
The 10th amendment, for all its powerful language, means essentially nothing. It merely neatly summarizes the concept (embodied in the entire structure of the US) that the national government is one of limited powers, where sovereignty flows from the people to the government, not the other way around. Moreover, its meaning or implications has never been tested or used, and is far to vague to derive any black letter law from, especially on a topic so removed as RIAA antitrust exemptions.
There is quite an outrage here about the difference in cost for textbooks bought in the USA versus those in foreign countries. But at least arbitrage will eventually stop this (assuming Congress or tariffs don't interfere). But an analogous situation prevents this sort of market correction for DVD's: the Region Code system. It is time for equal public attention and outrage against this system, and the DMCA which makes it possible.