Question: Does the judge have the authority to command an army of paramilitary police with ACTUAL assault weapons and armored vehicles? The DoJ does.
Another question: Despite the courts ruling that the Washington DC ban on firearms was unconstitutional, the law continues to be enforced. What weight does a judge's ruling have any longer?
The government (the executive) follows the law when it's convenient. It breaks the law when the law is inconvenient. And no one is interested in countering it.
Infections are bad. Sometimes they are really bad. I can't say I have ever had a serious infection. Could be I've had an extremely lucky life in this first world country I live in. I'm sure that factors in there somewhere. I have had lots of cuts, scrapes, breaks and even a tear of an epic nature. (I was a young teen, running through a field and tripped on a fallen and very old barbed wire fence while wearing sandals. Ripped a very bad area on the top of my foot... looked like a skinned catfish.) I was in a hospital within 2-3 hours, got shots, stitches and released within a few minutes of that. I'm sure some antibiotics were used during that event.
Not going to deny that antibiotics can save lives and limbs.
But we've got to have some sense and wisdom about this stuff. We need some tests not just for natural antibody counts, but for artificial antibody (antibiotics) counts as well. Ideally levels for antibiotics should be at or very nearly zero at any given time. This best enables the body's own natural immune system to function which keeps people generally more healthy and keeps vaccines more effective. (Did you know that a vaccine is useless without a healthy immune system? That's right. You already knew it too! You know a vaccine is a deactivated virus. You know that the body's immune system will adapt itself around the foreign invader to build resistance to it. So naturally, the immune system has to be healthy for this plan to work effectively right?) So it is absolutely critical that antibiotics levels are monitored and minimized.
While I'm not decided on it, I have given some thought to the AIDS situation and wonder how much of it may actually be caused by things other than a virus attacking the immune systems of people. (Not saying AIDS doesn't exist!) We have lots and lots of reasons why a person might have a weakened or even disabled immune system not the least of which is overexposure to antibiotics. I am reminded of the increased rate of diabetes in the US and its lose connection with HFCS. Here we have a body's sugar handling systems getting burned out from handling too much HFCS resulting in a broken system, or diabetes. I have to wonder if there are things other than HIV which may be attacking or even overloading the immune systems of people which leads to a broken immune system? I'm not expert on the topic, but given the general demographic of people with such problems, it would seem to me there may be more to it than gay sex and needle sharing which is at the source.
Regardless of anything else, I think it should be very well accepted that maintaining a strong and healthy immune system should be focus #1 of maintaining health among humans. Creating new antibiotics to handle the super-bugs resulting from the over-use of older antibiotics and/or the persistence of antibiotics in our food and water doesnt seem like a smart answer.
Knowing if something is right or wrong at the right time is key and is truly the issue with impulse control disorders. Typically this arises in no small part due to prioritization of feelings versus facts. Rage is a feeling. Perceived danger is a fact. One of these situation may call for the use of a firearm while the other does not. So which sort of mental disorder is also a matter which warrants scrutiny.
What you describe is someone making a reasoned decision of some sort. And you know, by that definition, it may well be the primary reason most high-level, powerful people, should be denied the right to bear arms. After all, aren't most corporate leaders, government leaders and military leaders sociopathic? Gives you something to think about when these people are attempting to disarm the rest of the population doesn't it?
And that's the way it's supposed to be done. The problem with the big copyright industry is that the big artists are harder to control and especially harder to take advantage of. Once their ridiculously abusive contracts are up and the band or artist has a strong and loyal fan base, the copyright clowns have no further control over anything new these people create. They won't tolerate it. So what have they been doing? They have dumbed down the products and the producers. They have genericized them to the point they lack originality and quality.
Why do we have 20+ year old bands out there as popular with people today as they were when I was a teenager? Quality is the reason, in my opinion. We had it long ago, and we don't have it today.
It has always been clear to the people here that it was never about artists and has always been about the copyright industry at large. Why else would we read so much about people being sued for copyright infringement over works which the plaintiffs have no clear title to? It has always been about this and always will be. Artists -- the good artists -- will always be fine so long as big copyright is unable to screw them over.
Are we responsible for the crimes we commit? If we are mentally ill, then surely we're not responsible. And if we're not responsible, then surely we need to have another "protected class" of people defined to prevent harassment, discrimination and unjust punishment. What they are attempting to do is reduce and even remove freedoms and rights which are both natural and constitutionally guaranteed. I'm not going to say that mentally unstable people should have access to dangerous things such as cars, knives, heavy bludgeoning devices and especially not firearms. If someone is indeed a "danger to society" we need to be serious about it -- very serious and very consistent. To deny someone their rights such as the right to self defense while at the same time not affording them appropriate protections under the law to compensate creates an extremely unfair situation.
Concealed Carry people do not commit crimes. It's an almost-zero statistic. In fact, CC people have been shown to actually thwart crime such as armed robbery and more than a few at Denny's restaurants.
It's also worth noting that places like Denny's is targeted for robbery more often than many other places in the same area. That can't possibly be due to the increased liklihood that armed people will not be present would it?
It must be controlled. It just doesn't get any more simple than that. For government, they haven't yet learned their mistakes [where default notion gotta catch'm all pokemon!] is but I'm sure they soon will. For businesses, the default notion of "lock it all down" will yeild a much more immediate backlash.
As in this story, the ban on Google glass should be countered by Google handing these things out in large numbers to volunteers who will go places which are known to be hostile to such things. When the public sees the hostility, they will respond in much the same way I have to Denny's restaurants -- the gun-free kill zones. I won't go there any longer. And the reasons are exactly the same.
People need to get over their knee-jerk fears and understand what it is they are dealing with. And only after understanding it properly should they take a position. Reacting out of fear is almost always a very bad idea.
While certain diplomatic and economic relations are under strain and protests go on all over, it's important to note that none of the surveillance and other civil rights and outright illegal activity has slowed or stopped at all. In some ways it seems to have increased.
Demanding that these activities cease is action #1.
That is absolutely amazing. (Not in any good way) TSA/ICE people literally have access to this stuff. It amazes me in an utterly horrifying way. That it's more international data sharing at this level should be cause for all manner of scrutiny and corrective action.
I'm sure Canadians and others are just about done with the US and what the government is up to.
1. To get more H1-Bs in 2. To accomplish a specific, often short-term goal 3. Empire building (hiring a lot of specialists under you makes you more important somehow) 4. Limit the number of applicants 5. Increase the odds of a good match for the company
I think the first one is obvious even if it's not universally applicable. The second speaks to a larger trend of short-term goals and contracts. The third is one I experienced only recently and it turned out the actual skill and capability of the individual isn't relevant once hired. If this manager has eight people under him, he's more important in some eyes than someone who only has two or three. Limiting applicants is the job of HR drones so when a job description is created, the IT people don't want good candidates weeded out because of a failed keyword matching process. It's not a perfect answer but it helps. The sad reality is that large numbers of unqualified people will apply for jobs they aren't suited for or simply aren't capable of performing. Being specific does act to limit that to some degree. (It's hard to keep assholes, cert chasers and pretenders out) And the fifth is admittedly redundant. Genuinely qualified applicants should still be able to get through the filters...hopefully.
One thing I suspect of many job descriptions is that some of the requirements aren't really requirements at all. But if they go with too small of a minimal list, it seriously makes it hard to screen and filter. Turns out there's a lot of unemployed people out there -- more than government figures would like to admit.
Seriously. If you want to get any kind of traction in a new market, ASK SLASHDOT. I'm not kidding at all. Sure there will be trolls and there will be some really stupid ideas. But if any group of people out there will be able to predict the success of a product offering and be able to voice the opinions of the market, it's this group right here.
We all knew Windows RT wasn't going to make it. But then again, we knew it based on Windows 8. You still haven't listened to you customers and support people (AKA Slashdot) in any of this.
And this is something you simply haven't tried yet. You keep doing the same crap, living on your bloated Win16, Win32, Win64 model which is now a security nightmare and what's it gotten you? Negative public opinion for one. Public doubt for another. If the public says anything it's that Windows isn't wanted when "something other than Windows" is available. You never should have made a Tablet version of Windows. It should have been a tablet version of anything else! And frankly, since Android is making more money for you than many other things, it seems to me you should just embrace it and run! But why not? Oh, because you don't control it... forgot about that little obsession. Well, you're controlling the market less than you did before anyway and it's just going to get worse. Embrace the change or be left behind.
You would think, but that's not quite what would happen. The US would become more like the 3rd world countries US companies like to exploit except it would be "multi-national" companies exploiting the people of the US on their terms. You can bet the government would find ways to relax labor laws here to enable it.
The US constitution is a limit of what government can do. Not just a limit on what the government can do to people living in the US. The very idea that it only applies to the people of the US is a twist of interpretation. The constitution is how this government should behave MORALLY. If it's immoral to do it in the US, it's still immoral to do it to other people.
Do you not understand the billions and billions of dollars they are creating out of thin air? There was a country in Africa which famously suffered from this in the past. Much inflation is being kept artificially low and, as demonstrated by the clear lack of connection between the money in the markets and the money in circulation, they are not quite related anyway. (I know that seems to counter my own point) but the fact remains that the value of each dollar decreases with each new dollar. But since the dollar is still (presently) the world's exchange currency, that's the only thing that's keeping the illusion alive. The very moment China gets its way, the US's value to the world will drop to zero or less in the time it takes to draw a last breath.
The fact is, the 3-letter spy agencies have ALWAYS capitalized on blackmail. That these agencies even exist, in my opinion, is based on their blackmail powers. But these days, as politicians are actually standing up for their wayward ways (thank Rob Ford and Bill Clinton!) I think it's time we stop persecuting people for being people. (Crack smoking mayor? I have to draw a line there but the idea is good.) If someone gambles, weigh it in on how you feel about them. If someone is gay, SO WHAT?! If someone likes to dress up like a girl (and isn't one) who cares?! As long as these people aren't hurting anyone else, it's time we judge people based on the jobs they are doing. This blackmail crap has got to end.
Should we have a government agency in charge of spying on politicians? MAYBE! But in charge of spying on EVERYONE? No.
Seriously? We just don't need to share that much information. There's no "reform" unless the US stops breaking ITS OWN LAWS. That's where reform starts.
As much as I would hate an even "worse" US life, I think it'd be for the best that the way government here is doing business ceases to be profitable.
I think the world is starting to wise up. The idea that the market is anything but a casino has taken root. It is demonstrable that the current highs in the market have little to no effect on the rest of the economy as [real] unemployment continues to grow, as businesses continue to decline, as welfare programs grow and on and on. Is the word recession or depression? I can never quite tell the difference and it doesn't help that the media and the players making money in all of this are in complete public denial over all of this.
The pedestrian banks are going to begin charging customers for keeping their money in accounts as interest rates are lowered to the point that lending profits are too low for operations to continue.
All of this and they have the gall to report on the market's activities as if it represented the economic health of the nation or the world? This reality is too big to hide any longer. This is especially true as the house votes to restore the conditions which trashed the world economy back when things really went bad before. It has passed the house but not yet the senate. I can't imagine what these people are thinking except that they don't care about the larger economy in the slightest and that's pretty much the 99% of us.
I have a particular experiment which, in my mind, highlights an aspect of human nature we would all prefer to deny. We all have within us the capacity to ruthlessly abuse others, even and especially friends and family when given the opportunity. This famous experiment a group of peers where some were assigned the role of prison guard and others that of prisoner. It really didn't take long before things went really bad.
I have often heard that corruption is a problem of opportunity more than of character. I believe it is generally true. I believe this has been common knowledge for centuries if not thousands of years. I believe the reason the US constitution was written as it is was to delay if not entirely prevent certain inevitable human behaviors. Our very nature as humans is our undoing. What enables us to survive beyond our primitive selves is our recognition and understanding of our natures and to inhibit and limit those aspects which are the most harmful.
"The goal of a good society is to structure social relations and institutions so that cooperative and generous impulses are rewarded, while antisocial ones are discouraged. The problem with capitalism is that it best rewards the worst part of us: ruthless, competitive, conniving, opportunistic, acquisitive drives, giving little reward and often much punishment to honesty, compassion, fair play, many forms of hard work, love of justice, and a concern for those in need...the enormous gap between what US leaders do in the world and what Americans think their leaders are doing is one of the great propaganda accomplishments of the dominant political mythology...the real danger we face is not from terrorism, but what is being done under the pretext of fighting it." ~ Michael Parenti
I am not a socialist or a communist. I believe we should all be allowed to seek our fortunes and to build lives of our choosing. However, we can only get to a certain point in development before we start tearing each other down. We have exceeded that point. We need to return to some middle ground.
Is it an appeal? Oh yes it is. These ass-clowns who think they have patents on the internet haven't yet faced the wrath of slashdot's anti-patent group of extremely knowledgeable and resourceful people.
I suspect a few people here with a little time on their hands will be able to prior-art their way to having the patent completely invalidated.
You would prefer that defendants be defenseless? In the US legal system, everything is on trial. The law, the defense, the prosecution, the evidence and witnesses are all open to scrutiny and testing. If something in the prosecution's case is not right, then the prosecution is potentially not right. I wouldn't have the system any other way.
I recall when I was first confronted with the reason Word Perfect was still (at the time) preferred for legal documents and especially court documents. That formatting absolutely needed to look a certain way even if it was ugly and primitive looking. Word Perfect could do it, MS Word not so much. I thought it was ridiculous, but perhaps not as ridiculous as this story.
Slashdot Mirror
Alsup is simply being careful as he should be. Not being careful opens doors for appeals which he seeks to avoid.
Question: Does the judge have the authority to command an army of paramilitary police with ACTUAL assault weapons and armored vehicles? The DoJ does.
Another question: Despite the courts ruling that the Washington DC ban on firearms was unconstitutional, the law continues to be enforced. What weight does a judge's ruling have any longer?
The government (the executive) follows the law when it's convenient. It breaks the law when the law is inconvenient. And no one is interested in countering it.
Infections are bad. Sometimes they are really bad. I can't say I have ever had a serious infection. Could be I've had an extremely lucky life in this first world country I live in. I'm sure that factors in there somewhere. I have had lots of cuts, scrapes, breaks and even a tear of an epic nature. (I was a young teen, running through a field and tripped on a fallen and very old barbed wire fence while wearing sandals. Ripped a very bad area on the top of my foot... looked like a skinned catfish.) I was in a hospital within 2-3 hours, got shots, stitches and released within a few minutes of that. I'm sure some antibiotics were used during that event.
Not going to deny that antibiotics can save lives and limbs.
But we've got to have some sense and wisdom about this stuff. We need some tests not just for natural antibody counts, but for artificial antibody (antibiotics) counts as well. Ideally levels for antibiotics should be at or very nearly zero at any given time. This best enables the body's own natural immune system to function which keeps people generally more healthy and keeps vaccines more effective. (Did you know that a vaccine is useless without a healthy immune system? That's right. You already knew it too! You know a vaccine is a deactivated virus. You know that the body's immune system will adapt itself around the foreign invader to build resistance to it. So naturally, the immune system has to be healthy for this plan to work effectively right?) So it is absolutely critical that antibiotics levels are monitored and minimized.
While I'm not decided on it, I have given some thought to the AIDS situation and wonder how much of it may actually be caused by things other than a virus attacking the immune systems of people. (Not saying AIDS doesn't exist!) We have lots and lots of reasons why a person might have a weakened or even disabled immune system not the least of which is overexposure to antibiotics. I am reminded of the increased rate of diabetes in the US and its lose connection with HFCS. Here we have a body's sugar handling systems getting burned out from handling too much HFCS resulting in a broken system, or diabetes. I have to wonder if there are things other than HIV which may be attacking or even overloading the immune systems of people which leads to a broken immune system? I'm not expert on the topic, but given the general demographic of people with such problems, it would seem to me there may be more to it than gay sex and needle sharing which is at the source.
Regardless of anything else, I think it should be very well accepted that maintaining a strong and healthy immune system should be focus #1 of maintaining health among humans. Creating new antibiotics to handle the super-bugs resulting from the over-use of older antibiotics and/or the persistence of antibiotics in our food and water doesnt seem like a smart answer.
Knowing if something is right or wrong at the right time is key and is truly the issue with impulse control disorders. Typically this arises in no small part due to prioritization of feelings versus facts. Rage is a feeling. Perceived danger is a fact. One of these situation may call for the use of a firearm while the other does not. So which sort of mental disorder is also a matter which warrants scrutiny.
What you describe is someone making a reasoned decision of some sort. And you know, by that definition, it may well be the primary reason most high-level, powerful people, should be denied the right to bear arms. After all, aren't most corporate leaders, government leaders and military leaders sociopathic? Gives you something to think about when these people are attempting to disarm the rest of the population doesn't it?
And that's the way it's supposed to be done. The problem with the big copyright industry is that the big artists are harder to control and especially harder to take advantage of. Once their ridiculously abusive contracts are up and the band or artist has a strong and loyal fan base, the copyright clowns have no further control over anything new these people create. They won't tolerate it. So what have they been doing? They have dumbed down the products and the producers. They have genericized them to the point they lack originality and quality.
Why do we have 20+ year old bands out there as popular with people today as they were when I was a teenager? Quality is the reason, in my opinion. We had it long ago, and we don't have it today.
It has always been clear to the people here that it was never about artists and has always been about the copyright industry at large. Why else would we read so much about people being sued for copyright infringement over works which the plaintiffs have no clear title to? It has always been about this and always will be. Artists -- the good artists -- will always be fine so long as big copyright is unable to screw them over.
Are we responsible for the crimes we commit? If we are mentally ill, then surely we're not responsible. And if we're not responsible, then surely we need to have another "protected class" of people defined to prevent harassment, discrimination and unjust punishment. What they are attempting to do is reduce and even remove freedoms and rights which are both natural and constitutionally guaranteed. I'm not going to say that mentally unstable people should have access to dangerous things such as cars, knives, heavy bludgeoning devices and especially not firearms. If someone is indeed a "danger to society" we need to be serious about it -- very serious and very consistent. To deny someone their rights such as the right to self defense while at the same time not affording them appropriate protections under the law to compensate creates an extremely unfair situation.
By breakfast, do you mean robbery?
Concealed Carry people do not commit crimes. It's an almost-zero statistic. In fact, CC people have been shown to actually thwart crime such as armed robbery and more than a few at Denny's restaurants.
It's also worth noting that places like Denny's is targeted for robbery more often than many other places in the same area. That can't possibly be due to the increased liklihood that armed people will not be present would it?
It must be controlled. It just doesn't get any more simple than that. For government, they haven't yet learned their mistakes [where default notion gotta catch'm all pokemon!] is but I'm sure they soon will. For businesses, the default notion of "lock it all down" will yeild a much more immediate backlash.
As in this story, the ban on Google glass should be countered by Google handing these things out in large numbers to volunteers who will go places which are known to be hostile to such things. When the public sees the hostility, they will respond in much the same way I have to Denny's restaurants -- the gun-free kill zones. I won't go there any longer. And the reasons are exactly the same.
People need to get over their knee-jerk fears and understand what it is they are dealing with. And only after understanding it properly should they take a position. Reacting out of fear is almost always a very bad idea.
While certain diplomatic and economic relations are under strain and protests go on all over, it's important to note that none of the surveillance and other civil rights and outright illegal activity has slowed or stopped at all. In some ways it seems to have increased.
Demanding that these activities cease is action #1.
That is absolutely amazing. (Not in any good way) TSA/ICE people literally have access to this stuff. It amazes me in an utterly horrifying way. That it's more international data sharing at this level should be cause for all manner of scrutiny and corrective action.
I'm sure Canadians and others are just about done with the US and what the government is up to.
1. To get more H1-Bs in
2. To accomplish a specific, often short-term goal
3. Empire building (hiring a lot of specialists under you makes you more important somehow)
4. Limit the number of applicants
5. Increase the odds of a good match for the company
I think the first one is obvious even if it's not universally applicable. The second speaks to a larger trend of short-term goals and contracts. The third is one I experienced only recently and it turned out the actual skill and capability of the individual isn't relevant once hired. If this manager has eight people under him, he's more important in some eyes than someone who only has two or three. Limiting applicants is the job of HR drones so when a job description is created, the IT people don't want good candidates weeded out because of a failed keyword matching process. It's not a perfect answer but it helps. The sad reality is that large numbers of unqualified people will apply for jobs they aren't suited for or simply aren't capable of performing. Being specific does act to limit that to some degree. (It's hard to keep assholes, cert chasers and pretenders out) And the fifth is admittedly redundant. Genuinely qualified applicants should still be able to get through the filters...hopefully.
One thing I suspect of many job descriptions is that some of the requirements aren't really requirements at all. But if they go with too small of a minimal list, it seriously makes it hard to screen and filter. Turns out there's a lot of unemployed people out there -- more than government figures would like to admit.
Seriously. If you want to get any kind of traction in a new market, ASK SLASHDOT. I'm not kidding at all. Sure there will be trolls and there will be some really stupid ideas. But if any group of people out there will be able to predict the success of a product offering and be able to voice the opinions of the market, it's this group right here.
We all knew Windows RT wasn't going to make it. But then again, we knew it based on Windows 8. You still haven't listened to you customers and support people (AKA Slashdot) in any of this.
And this is something you simply haven't tried yet. You keep doing the same crap, living on your bloated Win16, Win32, Win64 model which is now a security nightmare and what's it gotten you? Negative public opinion for one. Public doubt for another. If the public says anything it's that Windows isn't wanted when "something other than Windows" is available. You never should have made a Tablet version of Windows. It should have been a tablet version of anything else! And frankly, since Android is making more money for you than many other things, it seems to me you should just embrace it and run! But why not? Oh, because you don't control it... forgot about that little obsession. Well, you're controlling the market less than you did before anyway and it's just going to get worse. Embrace the change or be left behind.
And ASK people who know!
You would think, but that's not quite what would happen. The US would become more like the 3rd world countries US companies like to exploit except it would be "multi-national" companies exploiting the people of the US on their terms. You can bet the government would find ways to relax labor laws here to enable it.
The US constitution is a limit of what government can do. Not just a limit on what the government can do to people living in the US. The very idea that it only applies to the people of the US is a twist of interpretation. The constitution is how this government should behave MORALLY. If it's immoral to do it in the US, it's still immoral to do it to other people.
Do you not understand the billions and billions of dollars they are creating out of thin air? There was a country in Africa which famously suffered from this in the past. Much inflation is being kept artificially low and, as demonstrated by the clear lack of connection between the money in the markets and the money in circulation, they are not quite related anyway. (I know that seems to counter my own point) but the fact remains that the value of each dollar decreases with each new dollar. But since the dollar is still (presently) the world's exchange currency, that's the only thing that's keeping the illusion alive. The very moment China gets its way, the US's value to the world will drop to zero or less in the time it takes to draw a last breath.
The fact is, the 3-letter spy agencies have ALWAYS capitalized on blackmail. That these agencies even exist, in my opinion, is based on their blackmail powers. But these days, as politicians are actually standing up for their wayward ways (thank Rob Ford and Bill Clinton!) I think it's time we stop persecuting people for being people. (Crack smoking mayor? I have to draw a line there but the idea is good.) If someone gambles, weigh it in on how you feel about them. If someone is gay, SO WHAT?! If someone likes to dress up like a girl (and isn't one) who cares?! As long as these people aren't hurting anyone else, it's time we judge people based on the jobs they are doing. This blackmail crap has got to end.
Should we have a government agency in charge of spying on politicians? MAYBE! But in charge of spying on EVERYONE? No.
Seriously? We just don't need to share that much information. There's no "reform" unless the US stops breaking ITS OWN LAWS. That's where reform starts.
As much as I would hate an even "worse" US life, I think it'd be for the best that the way government here is doing business ceases to be profitable.
That doesn't quite account for the rapid devaluation of the dollar resulting from "quantitative easing" by the Federal Reserve Bank does it?
I think the world is starting to wise up. The idea that the market is anything but a casino has taken root. It is demonstrable that the current highs in the market have little to no effect on the rest of the economy as [real] unemployment continues to grow, as businesses continue to decline, as welfare programs grow and on and on. Is the word recession or depression? I can never quite tell the difference and it doesn't help that the media and the players making money in all of this are in complete public denial over all of this.
The pedestrian banks are going to begin charging customers for keeping their money in accounts as interest rates are lowered to the point that lending profits are too low for operations to continue.
All of this and they have the gall to report on the market's activities as if it represented the economic health of the nation or the world? This reality is too big to hide any longer. This is especially true as the house votes to restore the conditions which trashed the world economy back when things really went bad before. It has passed the house but not yet the senate. I can't imagine what these people are thinking except that they don't care about the larger economy in the slightest and that's pretty much the 99% of us.
I have a particular experiment which, in my mind, highlights an aspect of human nature we would all prefer to deny. We all have within us the capacity to ruthlessly abuse others, even and especially friends and family when given the opportunity. This famous experiment a group of peers where some were assigned the role of prison guard and others that of prisoner. It really didn't take long before things went really bad.
I have often heard that corruption is a problem of opportunity more than of character. I believe it is generally true. I believe this has been common knowledge for centuries if not thousands of years. I believe the reason the US constitution was written as it is was to delay if not entirely prevent certain inevitable human behaviors. Our very nature as humans is our undoing. What enables us to survive beyond our primitive selves is our recognition and understanding of our natures and to inhibit and limit those aspects which are the most harmful.
"The goal of a good society is to structure social relations and institutions so that cooperative and generous impulses are rewarded, while antisocial ones are discouraged. The problem with capitalism is that it best rewards the worst part of us: ruthless, competitive, conniving, opportunistic, acquisitive drives, giving little reward and often much punishment to honesty, compassion, fair play, many forms of hard work, love of justice, and a concern for those in need...the enormous gap between what US leaders do in the world and what Americans think their leaders are doing is one of the great propaganda accomplishments of the dominant political mythology ...the real danger we face is not from terrorism, but what is being done under the pretext of fighting it." ~ Michael Parenti
I am not a socialist or a communist. I believe we should all be allowed to seek our fortunes and to build lives of our choosing. However, we can only get to a certain point in development before we start tearing each other down. We have exceeded that point. We need to return to some middle ground.
You would be surprised. Appalled even.
Is it an appeal? Oh yes it is. These ass-clowns who think they have patents on the internet haven't yet faced the wrath of slashdot's anti-patent group of extremely knowledgeable and resourceful people.
I suspect a few people here with a little time on their hands will be able to prior-art their way to having the patent completely invalidated.
You would prefer that defendants be defenseless? In the US legal system, everything is on trial. The law, the defense, the prosecution, the evidence and witnesses are all open to scrutiny and testing. If something in the prosecution's case is not right, then the prosecution is potentially not right. I wouldn't have the system any other way.
I recall when I was first confronted with the reason Word Perfect was still (at the time) preferred for legal documents and especially court documents. That formatting absolutely needed to look a certain way even if it was ugly and primitive looking. Word Perfect could do it, MS Word not so much. I thought it was ridiculous, but perhaps not as ridiculous as this story.
Evolve or die trying.