The fact that stops are made along the way is a Good Thing and makes the system more efficient, especially in terms of passenger desirability. Planes go from Point A to Point B and that is it. If I were flying from DC to New Brunswick, NJ, I would have to fly from DC into Newark and then take a train/bus/car south for about 30 minutes. If I took the train, I could get on in DC, and get off in New Brunswick, 10 minutes from my house.
Basically my point is that if you don't want to go from Point A to Point B, but from Point A' (after Point A) to Point B' (before Point B), you can do this on a train. Trains can service smaller stops and smaller runs with much, much less impact than planes. There is very little cost to stop the train, save the 3-5 minutes and energy used during accelleration.
Superelevation is common with all rail systems worldwide. Maglev trains would most likely have much higher superelevation than is currently used, however. Amtrak's Acela trains have a car tilting system which effectively increases the superelevation of the passenger cars, allowing higher speeds. The track which the Acela runs on currently cannot be upgraded, for practical reasons.
Also, if you build stations on superelevated curves (sometimes necessary), you will change the distance between the train and (high-level) platform. This could require the use of bridge plates.
However if that's what you're doing I don't see any reason your job shouldn't be outsourced to India or China.
Why is that? What makes your job so special that it shouldn't also be outsourced? Are you implying the Indians or Chinese couldn't do what you do? But of course they could make software for a mass audience, because that is somehow 'easy'.
Linux supporters will never acknowledge the skill of Windows programmers except on one issue: The ability to magically alter code so that it not only breaks everything Linux related, but corrupts your data. Somehow, this code keeps running perfectly on every existing Windows installation.
Then again, that kind of trick is always described as 'easy' as well, so I guess credit isn't being given. Though if it were so easy, you'd think Microsoft might be doing a bit more of it, no?
The DoJ wasn't doing it because they weren't directed and more likely because they didn't have the money. Note that the language says "The bill authorizes appropriations to ensure...." That means "We're giving the DoJ money to enforce IP." If they didn't have the money to enforce IP in the budget before, they simply didn't do it. The DoJ does not recieve enough money to investigate everything, usually only enough for drugs and terrorism, or else we might have seen some of the people involved with Enron actually go to jail.
Absolutely ridiculous, especially when considering that no government was granted the power to regulate this
That's why it's being raised as a constitutional amendment. If the Constitution doesn't grant the legislature a power, they can always petition the states to have that power added.
Please pay attention to the political media. This bill is NOT dead, and the GOP plans on bringing it back for another vote, possibly in a small December working session, but most likely in January.
Oil companies, and some environmental groups, were well aware that many Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) could not properly contain MTBE. There are currently pending court cases where evidence has shown that MTBE manufacturers were well aware of the dangers. This did not stop the oil companies from allowing, and encouraging, MTBE usage, though. Then again, you probably think that tobacco companies shouldn't be liable for anything either, and that the American Lung Association should pay for the costs of lung cancer.
Your first statement is true, but it is not unconstitutional. The judiciary rules on matters of law, some as established by the legistlature, and some as established by the Constitution. If the legislature established constitutional laws which prohibit lawsuits, etc., then the judiciary can do nothing, as they are bound by the law. There is very little business law engrained in the Constitution (The only specific thing mentioned is limited patents and limited copyright). Much of the power of the Congress is derived from broad statements such as "to provide for the general Welfare of the United States". As such, the legislature has had to establish almost all of our business laws on their own. That means they are also free to change it at any time. Since new legislation always supercedes prior legislation, all that is needed to enact change are simple statements which establish new guidelines.
It should not be possible to alter a bill by slipping in little bits that are substantially different to the primary intent.
Well, it isn't possible, in some circumstances. House amendments must be germane, or appropriate to the issue at hand. However, so such rule exists in the Senate, and non-germane Senate amendments can be added to the conference report, if desired. The conference report is a compromise bill that gets final approval from both houses and gets sent to the president. It is (supposed to be) negotiated by members of both houses, and members of both parties. However, the GOP has taken a liking to negotiating the conference report in secret, with no Democrats present. Also, the germaneness of an amendment is decided by the chair, who is usually a member of the majority party. And, because of the way the rules are written, almost any amendment to a spending bill will be germane.
I guess the main point is that for the kind of task you use a four processor machine for, a few thousand dollars isn't much to pay for peace of mind.
Yeah and if someone had said that about Microsoft, they'd be flamed off the internet. In fact, they already have. Remember that Microsoft requires you to buy Professional Server or Datacenter Edition (I cannot recall) for machines with large amounts of memory and multiple processors. But that's not paying for peace of mind, that's being ripped off, I get it.
I'm not saying you can't raise shit, but it's really fucking dumb to raise contradictory points. Look up the "Contractor's Triangle" if you still don't understand.
Because that is only a year away. You have obviously never worked for government. Design (if applicable), procurement, setup and training for an election system could never occur in under a year. It could be possible, but with fundamental changes in the system. I would rather see it take 2 years, and have it done right, then have them rush a shoddy system into place for 2004.
This is yet another example of the ridiculous double standard. If the machine could have the paper replaced like normal reciept printers, you would be clamoring about the security of the paper record. They make it so that they never have to touch the thing, and you complain about the cost. It's one or the other, guys. Things cost money.
Slashdot Mirror
With a plane you only have a good chance of bringing it down when it's either taking off or landing, and airports are generally very well secured.
In terms of walking up and touching the plane, yeah. In terms of sitting outside the airport limits with an RPG launcher, no.
The fact that stops are made along the way is a Good Thing and makes the system more efficient, especially in terms of passenger desirability. Planes go from Point A to Point B and that is it. If I were flying from DC to New Brunswick, NJ, I would have to fly from DC into Newark and then take a train/bus/car south for about 30 minutes. If I took the train, I could get on in DC, and get off in New Brunswick, 10 minutes from my house.
Basically my point is that if you don't want to go from Point A to Point B, but from Point A' (after Point A) to Point B' (before Point B), you can do this on a train. Trains can service smaller stops and smaller runs with much, much less impact than planes. There is very little cost to stop the train, save the 3-5 minutes and energy used during accelleration.
Superelevation is common with all rail systems worldwide. Maglev trains would most likely have much higher superelevation than is currently used, however. Amtrak's Acela trains have a car tilting system which effectively increases the superelevation of the passenger cars, allowing higher speeds. The track which the Acela runs on currently cannot be upgraded, for practical reasons.
Also, if you build stations on superelevated curves (sometimes necessary), you will change the distance between the train and (high-level) platform. This could require the use of bridge plates.
However if that's what you're doing I don't see any reason your job shouldn't be outsourced to India or China.
Why is that? What makes your job so special that it shouldn't also be outsourced? Are you implying the Indians or Chinese couldn't do what you do? But of course they could make software for a mass audience, because that is somehow 'easy'.
Linux supporters will never acknowledge the skill of Windows programmers except on one issue: The ability to magically alter code so that it not only breaks everything Linux related, but corrupts your data. Somehow, this code keeps running perfectly on every existing Windows installation.
Then again, that kind of trick is always described as 'easy' as well, so I guess credit isn't being given. Though if it were so easy, you'd think Microsoft might be doing a bit more of it, no?
The GPL doesn't state that distributors have to supply source with all products, only that it is supplied on request.
You have to distribute source. Yes, you have the option to distribute it with the product, or at a later date when asked.
How is this "Bzzzzzzzzzzz!" worthy again? Or are we just paying homage to the Blues Brothers?
Could you give some examples of titles that you think won't be released on DVD?
The DoJ wasn't doing it because they weren't directed and more likely because they didn't have the money. Note that the language says "The bill authorizes appropriations to ensure...." That means "We're giving the DoJ money to enforce IP." If they didn't have the money to enforce IP in the budget before, they simply didn't do it. The DoJ does not recieve enough money to investigate everything, usually only enough for drugs and terrorism, or else we might have seen some of the people involved with Enron actually go to jail.
Absolutely ridiculous, especially when considering that no government was granted the power to regulate this
That's why it's being raised as a constitutional amendment. If the Constitution doesn't grant the legislature a power, they can always petition the states to have that power added.
Please pay attention to the political media. This bill is NOT dead, and the GOP plans on bringing it back for another vote, possibly in a small December working session, but most likely in January.
Oil companies, and some environmental groups, were well aware that many Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) could not properly contain MTBE. There are currently pending court cases where evidence has shown that MTBE manufacturers were well aware of the dangers. This did not stop the oil companies from allowing, and encouraging, MTBE usage, though. Then again, you probably think that tobacco companies shouldn't be liable for anything either, and that the American Lung Association should pay for the costs of lung cancer.
Your first statement is true, but it is not unconstitutional. The judiciary rules on matters of law, some as established by the legistlature, and some as established by the Constitution. If the legislature established constitutional laws which prohibit lawsuits, etc., then the judiciary can do nothing, as they are bound by the law. There is very little business law engrained in the Constitution (The only specific thing mentioned is limited patents and limited copyright). Much of the power of the Congress is derived from broad statements such as "to provide for the general Welfare of the United States". As such, the legislature has had to establish almost all of our business laws on their own. That means they are also free to change it at any time. Since new legislation always supercedes prior legislation, all that is needed to enact change are simple statements which establish new guidelines.
It should not be possible to alter a bill by slipping in little bits that are substantially different to the primary intent.
Well, it isn't possible, in some circumstances. House amendments must be germane, or appropriate to the issue at hand. However, so such rule exists in the Senate, and non-germane Senate amendments can be added to the conference report, if desired. The conference report is a compromise bill that gets final approval from both houses and gets sent to the president. It is (supposed to be) negotiated by members of both houses, and members of both parties. However, the GOP has taken a liking to negotiating the conference report in secret, with no Democrats present. Also, the germaneness of an amendment is decided by the chair, who is usually a member of the majority party. And, because of the way the rules are written, almost any amendment to a spending bill will be germane.
I guess the main point is that for the kind of task you use a four processor machine for, a few thousand dollars isn't much to pay for peace of mind.
Yeah and if someone had said that about Microsoft, they'd be flamed off the internet. In fact, they already have. Remember that Microsoft requires you to buy Professional Server or Datacenter Edition (I cannot recall) for machines with large amounts of memory and multiple processors. But that's not paying for peace of mind, that's being ripped off, I get it.
+1, Insightful? How about -1, Hypocrisy.
Considering Russia just locked up their richest man for participating in politics, I would say Russia is a poor choice.
I'm not saying you can't raise shit, but it's really fucking dumb to raise contradictory points. Look up the "Contractor's Triangle" if you still don't understand.
Because there isn't a design like that (that I know of). It takes money to design hardware.
What a joke. Who modded this piece of crap up?
No, if the system is correctly implemented, the reciepts will go into a box (separately), not be kept as a long journal reciept.
It really doesn't need to be a lasting record. Most election laws say that the election cannot be challenged 14-30 days after the election.
Voters or people of Voting Age? There is a huge difference, as turnout is ~35-50% currently.
But the again, if you can't fill in a circle then you probably shouldn't be voting.
What if I had my arms blown off in nam?
Because that is only a year away. You have obviously never worked for government. Design (if applicable), procurement, setup and training for an election system could never occur in under a year. It could be possible, but with fundamental changes in the system. I would rather see it take 2 years, and have it done right, then have them rush a shoddy system into place for 2004.
This is yet another example of the ridiculous double standard. If the machine could have the paper replaced like normal reciept printers, you would be clamoring about the security of the paper record. They make it so that they never have to touch the thing, and you complain about the cost. It's one or the other, guys. Things cost money.
Obviously, you've never played. Try racing at Martinsville. Yeah, it's all lefts, but damned if I can learn the course.