Sabri, your information is for general aviation flights operating under Part 91. For air carrier flights, that ultimate responsibility is shared between the pilot and the operator company. Safety, in particular separation of aircraft in the appropriate airspace is also a joint responsibility, that includes the air traffic control service provider.
It is interesting that DAR.fm (an online radio recording service) has survived legal challenges, but Aereo is now in jeopardy for a providing similar service for TV even though it uses antennas at customers' locations.
Ethanol, as currently used to water down gasoline in the USA with corn is a scam. It is a huge gift for the corn growers, for ADM, for the ethanol lobbyists. Everyone else looses. It takes enormous energy to cultivate, grow the corn and then process and generate the ethanol. When all of that is done, you have a product that contains less energy in the gasoline it displaces. You've already created tons of greenhouse gas emissions BEFORE the ethanol enters a car's gas (ethanol) tank.
Ethanol is charged highway fuels taxes to consumers just as the gasoline component is, but the ethanol companies get to KEEP their share. It is a double subsidy. No wonder big ethanol is fighting so hard to keep corn ethanol in our gas tanks and even increase its use!
Sure, you can design new equipment to handle high ethanol concentrations, but a lot of stuff already out there isn't compatible. And the consumer still loses while the lobbyists/special interests collect our money.
In Brazil, ethanol is widely available for cars, almost pure ethanol. But drivers have a choice--gasoline and ethanol. (ethanol is a lot cheaper, but it contains less energy too. But the biggest difference is that their ethanol is produced with Sugar Cane---a much more efficient and less expensive process than the corn ethanol nonsense we are being subjected to in USA.
If we must have ethanol, then give consumers a choice. Put the ethanol pump in a separate place, and allow consumers to buy what they want. Gasoline OR ethanol, not watered down junk.
You are assuming that the glidepath is the only reference for an aircraft on a CAT III approach. But CAT III (and II) also require a radar altimeter, which would foil a Die Hard II scheme.
In addition, the aircraft would not be at the proper height for its location along the approach.
But it was a fun movie to watch, even if extremely unrealistic.
In North America, there is ONE refinery still producing it. And they pretty much only run a batch once a year - an entire day's production is sufficient for an entire year. Something like all the avgas used in a year is equal to all the regular gas used by cars in a day.
Don't suppose you have a reference for that assertion do you? There are several refineries in USA that make avgas, and production is much larger than a day.
In 2009 there were 10 refineries making avgas, this article indicates there "seven or eight" in 2011.
Check out this table , courtesy of the Energy Information Administration, for a summary of regions where avgas is produced.
Engine kill anti theft devices based on keys with chips on them have been in place for years. Cars equipped with them at the factory still show up in the Top Stolen Car lists. It's a nice idea, but certainly not fail-proof and devices like aftermarket alarms bypass the anti-theft systems before the thief even arrives.
How much time before Bush bans Rand McNally Maps & Globes?
GPS was originally planned to be available to US military only. After the Soviets shot down a civilian Korean passenger airliner who had ventured off course due to poor navigation, President Reagan decided to make a civillian GPS signal available to the world at no cost.
Since GPS was born, the US has always maintained the right to degrade the accuracy or shut off the system to civilian users. If somebody wants to make their critical system dependent on GPS, that is their right--but it does not change GPS's owner the right to shut if off if necessary. All Bush has done is request to plan for a GPS shutdown and improve the procedure, if one is ever necessary. A goal of this is to be able to shutdown GPS in a local area.
Geezsh, why doesn't he just shut down the VOR and NDB systems while he's at it.
The Security Control of Air Traffic and Air Navigation Aids plan has been in place for decades.
During events that affect national security, the military can preempt normal traffic handling and take control/disable of civilian navigation aids (including ground based beacons and runway aids) under SCATANA to prevent them from being (mis)used.
When Selective Availability was shut off in 2000, it was also emphasized that the GPS signal could be degraded or shut off in select areas if needed in the future. The current order seems to clarify or improve this process.
Weld, Cellucci, Swift, and Romney are ALL republicans. Massachusetts is most certainly NOT a one-party state, and it shows how truly ignorant you are to think that it is.
However, with lawmaking, the governor is largely not relevant in Massachusetts. This is what sets it apart from nearly every other state. The Democrats run the state solo because they have veto proof majorities in both houses. The state house speaker essentially runs much of the state and members are afraid to vote against him.
Finally, Ronald Reagan vetoed the Big Dig, with a vision saying it was a classic example of pork barrel spending.
Senator Kennedy engineered the override in the U.S. Senate by promising votes for Big Tobacco subsidies in North Carolina. House Speaker "Tip" O'Neill engineered the override in the U.S. House.
IIRC the Big Dig is the first project in MA built using Federal Highway funds. The other major interstate highways in MA - I-90, I-91, I-93 and I-95 - were built with state funds
With the exception of most of I-90, the Massachusetts Turnpike, your comment is incorrect. Federal highway funds were used in the creation/upkeep of all of the other roads mentioned, and many more. (The short "central artery" portion of I-93 was built before it was an Interstate, and was paid with state funds)
I support the intent of this letter, but do we really want the government to start going after third party mail server operators? It seems like a real slippery slope of government regulation and intervention. Better get that sendmail.cf file perfect the first time or Big Brother will come knocking to straighten you out!
I would prefer if the FTC spent their time going after the spammers, which are the real problem.
If the business keeps logs, they may be subpoenaed. If they do not keep logs in their course of business, there is nothing to be subpoenaed, so this is an acceptable answer if a subpoena is issued.
However, once a subpoena has been issued, or there is a reason to believe a subpoena will be issued, the materials (logs) under question may NOT be destroyed.
The only logs that RIAA was looking for was to match a name to an IP address and date/time range. As an ISP, Verizon would have good reason to keep this information for a while in case there is abuse , etc. So they probably would want to hang on to these logs, at least for a short period of time. This would of course leave the logs open to a subpoena during the time before they delete them.
The reason that all tax cuts go to the middle and upper class taxpayers is because they are the only ones paying taxes! The top 50% of income earners pay 96.09% of total tax revenues collected by the IRS. You can verify this at the IRS's own web site. Every year fewer and fewer Americans pay a larger and larger share of taxes as the burden shifts. It is hard to expect a tax "cut" when you're not paying any income taxes to begin with.
In addition, every time the federal government has significantly reduced taxes, starting with the JFK administration, tax revenues have INCREASED. Less tax rates mean more money in the hands in the people, which means a healthier economy, which means more taxable income and more taxpayers, which means more tax REVENUE.
American tax laws require the buy to pay sales tax in the state in which he purchased it.
That's not technically true. State laws can require merchants to collect their sales tax when the item is sold WITHIN the state. If it is sold (ie. shipped) to another state where the merchant does not have a presence, federal courts have ruled that the merchant does not have to collect sales tax. They still can if they choose to do so.
The state where the item is shipped TO can charge use tax, which is identical % to its sales tax, if sales tax was not paid at the purchase. The buyer is responsible to pay the use tax.
This is a generalization. Laws vary from state to state. Not all states (eg. NV,DE,NH) charge sales/use tax and nobody is forced to live in a state that does.
It then expects the buyer to report these taxes when he files his tax returns.
Again, not always true. Some states do require use tax to be paid on income tax returns (eg. NC). Other states require that use tax to be paid independently of normal income tax returns (eg. MA). Either way they do want the buyer to pay the tax. And it is almost impossible to enforce, except for things like vehicles which are registered with the state.
Slashdot Mirror
Sabri, your information is for general aviation flights operating under Part 91. For air carrier flights, that ultimate responsibility is shared between the pilot and the operator company. Safety, in particular separation of aircraft in the appropriate airspace is also a joint responsibility, that includes the air traffic control service provider.
It is interesting that DAR.fm (an online radio recording service) has survived legal challenges, but Aereo is now in jeopardy for a providing similar service for TV even though it uses antennas at customers' locations.
Ethanol, as currently used to water down gasoline in the USA with corn is a scam. It is a huge gift for the corn growers, for ADM, for the ethanol lobbyists. Everyone else looses. It takes enormous energy to cultivate, grow the corn and then process and generate the ethanol. When all of that is done, you have a product that contains less energy in the gasoline it displaces. You've already created tons of greenhouse gas emissions BEFORE the ethanol enters a car's gas (ethanol) tank. Ethanol is charged highway fuels taxes to consumers just as the gasoline component is, but the ethanol companies get to KEEP their share. It is a double subsidy. No wonder big ethanol is fighting so hard to keep corn ethanol in our gas tanks and even increase its use! Sure, you can design new equipment to handle high ethanol concentrations, but a lot of stuff already out there isn't compatible. And the consumer still loses while the lobbyists/special interests collect our money. In Brazil, ethanol is widely available for cars, almost pure ethanol. But drivers have a choice--gasoline and ethanol. (ethanol is a lot cheaper, but it contains less energy too. But the biggest difference is that their ethanol is produced with Sugar Cane---a much more efficient and less expensive process than the corn ethanol nonsense we are being subjected to in USA. If we must have ethanol, then give consumers a choice. Put the ethanol pump in a separate place, and allow consumers to buy what they want. Gasoline OR ethanol, not watered down junk.
You are assuming that the glidepath is the only reference for an aircraft on a CAT III approach. But CAT III (and II) also require a radar altimeter, which would foil a Die Hard II scheme.
In addition, the aircraft would not be at the proper height for its location along the approach.
But it was a fun movie to watch, even if extremely unrealistic.
Don't suppose you have a reference for that assertion do you? There are several refineries in USA that make avgas, and production is much larger than a day.
In 2009 there were 10 refineries making avgas, this article indicates there "seven or eight" in 2011.
Check out this table , courtesy of the Energy Information Administration, for a summary of regions where avgas is produced.
Engine kill anti theft devices based on keys with chips on them have been in place for years. Cars equipped with them at the factory still show up in the Top Stolen Car lists. It's a nice idea, but certainly not fail-proof and devices like aftermarket alarms bypass the anti-theft systems before the thief even arrives.
GPS was originally planned to be available to US military only. After the Soviets shot down a civilian Korean passenger airliner who had ventured off course due to poor navigation, President Reagan decided to make a civillian GPS signal available to the world at no cost.
Since GPS was born, the US has always maintained the right to degrade the accuracy or shut off the system to civilian users. If somebody wants to make their critical system dependent on GPS, that is their right--but it does not change GPS's owner the right to shut if off if necessary. All Bush has done is request to plan for a GPS shutdown and improve the procedure, if one is ever necessary. A goal of this is to be able to shutdown GPS in a local area.
The Security Control of Air Traffic and Air Navigation Aids plan has been in place for decades.
During events that affect national security, the military can preempt normal traffic handling and take control/disable of civilian navigation aids (including ground based beacons and runway aids) under SCATANA to prevent them from being (mis)used.
When Selective Availability was shut off in 2000, it was also emphasized that the GPS signal could be degraded or shut off in select areas if needed in the future. The current order seems to clarify or improve this process.
However, with lawmaking, the governor is largely not relevant in Massachusetts. This is what sets it apart from nearly every other state. The Democrats run the state solo because they have veto proof majorities in both houses. The state house speaker essentially runs much of the state and members are afraid to vote against him.
Finally, Ronald Reagan vetoed the Big Dig, with a vision saying it was a classic example of pork barrel spending. Senator Kennedy engineered the override in the U.S. Senate by promising votes for Big Tobacco subsidies in North Carolina. House Speaker "Tip" O'Neill engineered the override in the U.S. House.
IIRC the Big Dig is the first project in MA built using Federal Highway funds. The other major interstate highways in MA - I-90, I-91, I-93 and I-95 - were built with state funds
With the exception of most of I-90, the Massachusetts Turnpike, your comment is incorrect. Federal highway funds were used in the creation/upkeep of all of the other roads mentioned, and many more. (The short "central artery" portion of I-93 was built before it was an Interstate, and was paid with state funds)
I support the intent of this letter, but do we really want the government to start going after third party mail server operators? It seems like a real slippery slope of government regulation and intervention. Better get that sendmail.cf file perfect the first time or Big Brother will come knocking to straighten you out!
I would prefer if the FTC spent their time going after the spammers, which are the real problem.
I'm not sure what you meant by But the RIAA never got a subpoena.
RIAA certainly did serve Verizon with a subpoena, on July 24, 2002. This is what the entire case is about, RIAA seeking to enforce that very subpoena.
You can read the January 2003 District Court Judge's order, which explains all of this.However, once a subpoena has been issued, or there is a reason to believe a subpoena will be issued, the materials (logs) under question may NOT be destroyed.
The only logs that RIAA was looking for was to match a name to an IP address and date/time range. As an ISP, Verizon would have good reason to keep this information for a while in case there is abuse , etc. So they probably would want to hang on to these logs, at least for a short period of time. This would of course leave the logs open to a subpoena during the time before they delete them.
The reason that all tax cuts go to the middle and upper class taxpayers is because they are the only ones paying taxes! The top 50% of income earners pay 96.09% of total tax revenues collected by the IRS. You can verify this at the IRS's own web site. Every year fewer and fewer Americans pay a larger and larger share of taxes as the burden shifts. It is hard to expect a tax "cut" when you're not paying any income taxes to begin with.
In addition, every time the federal government has significantly reduced taxes, starting with the JFK administration, tax revenues have INCREASED. Less tax rates mean more money in the hands in the people, which means a healthier economy, which means more taxable income and more taxpayers, which means more tax REVENUE.
That's not technically true. State laws can require merchants to collect their sales tax when the item is sold WITHIN the state. If it is sold (ie. shipped) to another state where the merchant does not have a presence, federal courts have ruled that the merchant does not have to collect sales tax. They still can if they choose to do so. The state where the item is shipped TO can charge use tax, which is identical % to its sales tax, if sales tax was not paid at the purchase. The buyer is responsible to pay the use tax.
This is a generalization. Laws vary from state to state. Not all states (eg. NV,DE,NH) charge sales/use tax and nobody is forced to live in a state that does.
It then expects the buyer to report these taxes when he files his tax returns.
Again, not always true. Some states do require use tax to be paid on income tax returns (eg. NC). Other states require that use tax to be paid independently of normal income tax returns (eg. MA). Either way they do want the buyer to pay the tax. And it is almost impossible to enforce, except for things like vehicles which are registered with the state.