Now let's look at how often the Supreme Court decides that the 9th got it wrong. Last term, the Supreme Court's reversal rate for 9th Circuit cases was 90.5 percent. Yikes—that's huge! But wait, for on-the-merits cases, the Supremes reversed the 3rd and 5th Circuits almost all of the time* last term. Cases from state appellate courts fared no better: They also had a 100 percent reversal rate. Overall, this past term the Supreme Court reversed 75.3 percent of the cases they considered on their merits. The pattern holds true for the 2004 and 2005 terms as well, when the Supremes had overall reversal rates of 76.8 percent and 75.6 percent, respectively. For those years, the 9th was reversed 84 percent and 88.9 percent of the time, or about a case or two more each year than it would have been if it had conformed to the reversal rate of the other circuits. How do one or two cases a year add up to a court run amuck?
You realize that we pay well above what most countries in europe pay for health care? This is on a per person basis, so we should be able to get UHC for less than we spend now. All you have to do is machine gun some lobbyists first...
There are no pending tax increases - that's just the temp tax cuts expiring. Calling something that's been on the radar for a decade an increase is disingenuous. Congress just irritates me any more - Ds are cowards and Rs are being obstructionist.
Oppressive regulation? Do you mean like Glass Steagel and requiring actual due diligence when foreclosing on a house? Next you'll whine about high taxes and complain about how crappy your roads are.
After he's guilty, due process protects him from capricious punishment. For instance, due process means that you can't declare public urination a sex offense and then require someone who was convicted in the past of that offense to register as a sex offender and abide by all the restrictions imposed on those people.
See, that doesn't make sense to me. If someone's argument is wrong at several points, you explain each & every single point where it is wrong. You break every point in the logical chain that you can.
Why? It's enough to dismiss the case. If they want to try again, they can refile.
I'd rather it be thrown out because it's fundamentally insane
Sure, but that's more work. This is cut and dried, so no need to examine and prove the insanity therein.
This way it just looks like an open door for (a) her to try and get in with a different law (b) anyone else with a commercial interest to protect to fire up a search engine and see if they have an unexpected payday waiting.
a) she's welcome to try and b) this isn't something that establishes precedent (IANAL), so nothing changes.
No, it means that she can't sue because of a lack of commercial interest. Nothing is said about other reasons for throwing the case out - one is enough.
and your GPU is managed much differently than the rest of the system. I can get 24 real cores with 48 virtual ones now, but apparently, it's going to be a pain to use efficiently.
A business is represented by the behavior of it's employees
That's insane. A business is represented by its products, professional history, and its execs. Nobody cares that some reckless idiot works for microsoft.
What you say about yourself and who you associate with is a pretty clear indicator of who you are, and I can't fault the company too much for being able to research things publicly posted.
How is this relevant to being a drug user? You assume they're derelicts hanging out in opium dens or something, when they're just the guy building the next ecommerce platform.
Slashdot Mirror
The sapphire crystal is pretty nice - I got an invicta watch with one of those for about $300 and it shows no wear on the face.
You're kidding, right? Look at this:
No they don't, they get more decisions overturned because the 9th is really big. It isn't really out of line from other circuits.
What's your problem with the 9th? Sure, it gets appealed a lot, but hey, it's a fairly large jurisdiction.
You realize that we pay well above what most countries in europe pay for health care? This is on a per person basis, so we should be able to get UHC for less than we spend now. All you have to do is machine gun some lobbyists first...
Hello, record profits and stagnant wages?
If the same HR department showered some employees with glowing praise and was neutral for others, then we'd have a problem.
That's germany; it's illegal to badmouth, so neutral to positive commentary = bad, while obsequious praise = good.
There are no pending tax increases - that's just the temp tax cuts expiring. Calling something that's been on the radar for a decade an increase is disingenuous. Congress just irritates me any more - Ds are cowards and Rs are being obstructionist.
Oppressive regulation? Do you mean like Glass Steagel and requiring actual due diligence when foreclosing on a house? Next you'll whine about high taxes and complain about how crappy your roads are.
Don't forget blaming the resulting deficit on tax & spend liberals (somehow).
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.
The competent know when to make it their first.
What makes you think the cops would care? They haven't shown much restraint in the past.
After he's guilty, due process protects him from capricious punishment. For instance, due process means that you can't declare public urination a sex offense and then require someone who was convicted in the past of that offense to register as a sex offender and abide by all the restrictions imposed on those people.
I sort of do - even the guilty deserve due process.
Kids today! When I was a lad, we would've killed for a Sulfuric Acid atmosphere. We had to make our own air!
"please to be rebooting the computer" - woo, no thanks.
See, that doesn't make sense to me. If someone's argument is wrong at several points, you explain each & every single point where it is wrong. You break every point in the logical chain that you can.
Why? It's enough to dismiss the case. If they want to try again, they can refile.
I'd rather it be thrown out because it's fundamentally insane
Sure, but that's more work. This is cut and dried, so no need to examine and prove the insanity therein.
This way it just looks like an open door for (a) her to try and get in with a different law (b) anyone else with a commercial interest to protect to fire up a search engine and see if they have an unexpected payday waiting.
a) she's welcome to try and b) this isn't something that establishes precedent (IANAL), so nothing changes.
No, it means that she can't sue because of a lack of commercial interest. Nothing is said about other reasons for throwing the case out - one is enough.
I guess you should go look at what actually happened with GM - it's not like they got a giant check.
and your GPU is managed much differently than the rest of the system. I can get 24 real cores with 48 virtual ones now, but apparently, it's going to be a pain to use efficiently.
Who decides if it's innovative? The really interesting stuff takes a while to be recognized for what it is.
At that point, hardly anyone had networks.
And I kind of think that's a good thing.
I'll keep that in mind when people start talking about you for taking your neighbor's daughter to the playground.
A business is represented by the behavior of it's employees
That's insane. A business is represented by its products, professional history, and its execs. Nobody cares that some reckless idiot works for microsoft.
What you say about yourself and who you associate with is a pretty clear indicator of who you are, and I can't fault the company too much for being able to research things publicly posted.
How is this relevant to being a drug user? You assume they're derelicts hanging out in opium dens or something, when they're just the guy building the next ecommerce platform.