As I understand it [disclaimer I am not a lawyer], most state NN laws basically state, "if you wish to be elgible for state contracts, you must do X, Y, and Z", where X, Y, and Z are NN principles.
They don't (and can't, per the Commerce Clause) enforce neutrality by fiat, they say, "if you want to do business WITH THIS STATE*, you must be network neutral." ${TELECOM} is free to not implement NN, but don't bother coming to contract with us. A State may set whatever criteria it wishes for the entities it contracts with.
* "With this state" as opposed to "within this state". Key distinction.
I suspect it's a typo or a verbal slip up. I think the actual line is 8000 kilonewtons, but it's been a while since I've seen it. I suspect it was supposed to be either 8kN or 8000N.
And THAT is perfectly acceptable. It's not saying "The States must do X". It's saying, "To be eligible for these funds, a State must meet requirement X".
Yes, it's an end run around the 10th, but it's technically constitutional. Which, as we all know, is the best kind of constitutional.
Unless they make it a funding thing, like the old 55MPH limit. Technically, the Feds never mandated a 55 limit (though I could probably make a constitutional argument that Interstate Highway System and the US Highway system fall under the Commerce Clause), but simply said that if the limit is over 55, no federal highway funds.
This bill might be similar. E.g., something like: "No State shall receive any federal election funding unless the following conditions are met for federal elections..."
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that it's always "MY congresscritter does a good job... it's those OTHER assholes that are the problem".
Came for the Black Mirror comment. Wasn't disappointed.
Even worse... it's ILLEGAL Space Alien Terrorists!
Thank you.
Like the Regal Beagle. (est 1977)
I was 6 and glued to the coverage.
Of course, my dad was working Apollo, but I was a space geek even back then.
As I understand it [disclaimer I am not a lawyer], most state NN laws basically state, "if you wish to be elgible for state contracts, you must do X, Y, and Z", where X, Y, and Z are NN principles.
They don't (and can't, per the Commerce Clause) enforce neutrality by fiat, they say, "if you want to do business WITH THIS STATE*, you must be network neutral." ${TELECOM} is free to not implement NN, but don't bother coming to contract with us. A State may set whatever criteria it wishes for the entities it contracts with.
* "With this state" as opposed to "within this state". Key distinction.
I suspect it's a typo or a verbal slip up. I think the actual line is 8000 kilonewtons, but it's been a while since I've seen it. I suspect it was supposed to be either 8kN or 8000N.
Ubuntu Bionic (18.04). They dropped Unity and went back to GNOME.
Please allow me to clarify. When I said F-1 engine, I was referring to the LOX/Kerosene engine used to power a Saturn V. Not the model rocket solid.
The episode is "The Staircase Implementation".
Well, unless you count Howard's super rocket fuel allowing a model rocket to generate 8MN of thrust.
That's roughly equivalent to an F-1 engine.
Apparently, nobody learned anything from the Fawn Hall episode.
Just imagine how bad things would be for her if she was a Reality Loser!
Dude, it was a Futurama joke.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hou0lU8WMgo
And THAT is perfectly acceptable. It's not saying "The States must do X". It's saying, "To be eligible for these funds, a State must meet requirement X".
Yes, it's an end run around the 10th, but it's technically constitutional. Which, as we all know, is the best kind of constitutional.
Nope. Not mentioned in the Constitution at all. The only thing there is how the Electoral College votes.
Each State may select its Electoral College members in whatever manner it so chooses.
Unless they make it a funding thing, like the old 55MPH limit. Technically, the Feds never mandated a 55 limit (though I could probably make a constitutional argument that Interstate Highway System and the US Highway system fall under the Commerce Clause), but simply said that if the limit is over 55, no federal highway funds.
This bill might be similar. E.g., something like: "No State shall receive any federal election funding unless the following conditions are met for federal elections..."
What's the Megafonzie rating of the AI?
The next day Amit Agarwal announced that he was voluntarily leaving Amazon "to spend more time with his family".
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html
I'm shocked! SHOCKED, I tell you!!!
Ever been to any of the Caribbean islands? White powder sand like you wouldn't believe.
Still gets into everything, though.
What is sad is that I actually remember watching that movie.
Nigel Tufnel, is that you?
Resolution: WONTFIX
Reason: Works for me