The first paragraph describes the situations where the judicial branch has jurisdiction. There is no mention of regulation nor exemption; it's a simple list of the kinds of situations that federal courts deal with. Including, among others, "all cases arising under the Constitution".
The second paragraph describes when the Supreme Court itself has original jurisdiction, as opposed to when it has appellate jurisdiction. It describes "in all other cases... the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction... with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
I think it's clear that Congress's power to "regulate" the Court is only the ability to decide that certain kinds of cases should go directly to the Supreme Court rather than starting at a lower court. I don't see anything here about bypassing the courts entirely.
Seems to me that if I were the President and the court "required" me to do something or otherwise behave in some unconstitutional way, that it would be my sworn duty to tell 'em where to stick it.
Did Eisenhower start this court-cowering? He didn't agree that the Feds had the right to force school integration in Alabama, but sent the troops anyway because the court said so.
Of course, then there's W, who signed McCain-Feingold while announcing his belief that it was unconstitutional and would be struck down. Well then don't sign it!!
...that there's no way something this asinine could possibly pass 1st Amendment muster. Especially since political speech is exactly the epicenter of that amendment. I would say that, but I also witnessed all three branches of the federal government fail us spectacularly on McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform.
Most companies would keep plodding along, doing exactly what they've been doing because that's what they do. Sega would have fallen farther and farther behind and eventually evaporated to the sound of nobody caring.
This is why executives get the big bucks (not that all of them are worth it). You need somebody able to step back and evaluate where the company really stands.
It seems that the people who are bringing flaws to light are cast as the villains, while nobody even considers blaming or even questioning the people who selected a poorly-implemented system to run an entire city's public transit.
Well hang on now. Militaries create all kinds of plans all the time. Invasion plans, disruption plans, assassination plans. Against both friend and foe. They know that there's a >99% chance that none of them will ever be used, but when you do decide to go after somebody, you'd better have a plan ready.
That was the point I was making. I'd like to believe that I would notice. What I'm describing generally is a way to take advantage of the DNS flaw to fool some people without resorting to phishing. (See the parent of my first post.)
Expiring (especially by a few days) would seem to be the most minor of SSL infractions. I'd rather see data when the certificate is for a different site from the one they're trying to access.
Maybe I'm not paranoid enough, but when I go to the bank's site I type "bankname" in the URL bar and hit CTRL+Enter. The bank's HTTP site redirects me to the HTTPS site. If the DNS had been hijacked and I wasn't paying attention to whether that redirect happened, that could be an attack vector.
You should really look into Linode. They manage the underlying hardware, and you are the sole root on each of your virtual servers. Loads of bandwidth, cheap per month. I've never heard of them descending into a user's filesystem, because there's no reason to. Management of the virtual server is completely up to you.
Anybody know of a motherboard with HDMI out that supports audio? The closest I've seen is the Asus P5E-VM HDMI, but haven't been able to find anything definitive on HDMI audio support in Linux.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that a cell phone transmitter (having to reach from the phone to the tower) is on the order of one watt, while your Bluetooth headset (having to reach only a few feet) is on the order of one milliwatt.
The trick there is that the small-government people have the best arguments, the best historical and Constitutional support, and the most cruft to chop out, at the federal level.
If the government wants to start a program to get more women into science and engineering fields, it should be aimed at young kids.
Okay, but why should it do that? How about presenting kids with a wide range of options for what to do with their lives, and let them decide what's interesting?
I think that's pretty close to what we're doing now, and if that means there aren't many women in engineering, then that's the way it is.
Much of this is finding a way to brute-force the methods used on particular sites, overwhelming randomness, etc. It's not really a computer reading any difficult text.
Slashdot Mirror
Went and read Article III, Section 2.
The first paragraph describes the situations where the judicial branch has jurisdiction. There is no mention of regulation nor exemption; it's a simple list of the kinds of situations that federal courts deal with. Including, among others, "all cases arising under the Constitution".
The second paragraph describes when the Supreme Court itself has original jurisdiction, as opposed to when it has appellate jurisdiction. It describes "in all other cases... the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction... with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
I think it's clear that Congress's power to "regulate" the Court is only the ability to decide that certain kinds of cases should go directly to the Supreme Court rather than starting at a lower court. I don't see anything here about bypassing the courts entirely.
Seems to me that if I were the President and the court "required" me to do something or otherwise behave in some unconstitutional way, that it would be my sworn duty to tell 'em where to stick it.
Did Eisenhower start this court-cowering? He didn't agree that the Feds had the right to force school integration in Alabama, but sent the troops anyway because the court said so.
Of course, then there's W, who signed McCain-Feingold while announcing his belief that it was unconstitutional and would be struck down. Well then don't sign it!!
...that there's no way something this asinine could possibly pass 1st Amendment muster. Especially since political speech is exactly the epicenter of that amendment. I would say that, but I also witnessed all three branches of the federal government fail us spectacularly on McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform.
Most companies would keep plodding along, doing exactly what they've been doing because that's what they do. Sega would have fallen farther and farther behind and eventually evaporated to the sound of nobody caring.
This is why executives get the big bucks (not that all of them are worth it). You need somebody able to step back and evaluate where the company really stands.
...With or without Yahoo's option.
AdBlock Plus
Is this humanity's insurance policy against catastrophic changes, where the old rules don't apply?
It seems that the people who are bringing flaws to light are cast as the villains, while nobody even considers blaming or even questioning the people who selected a poorly-implemented system to run an entire city's public transit.
What do they do? (Genuinely curious.)
Well hang on now. Militaries create all kinds of plans all the time. Invasion plans, disruption plans, assassination plans. Against both friend and foe. They know that there's a >99% chance that none of them will ever be used, but when you do decide to go after somebody, you'd better have a plan ready.
That was the point I was making. I'd like to believe that I would notice. What I'm describing generally is a way to take advantage of the DNS flaw to fool some people without resorting to phishing. (See the parent of my first post.)
Expiring (especially by a few days) would seem to be the most minor of SSL infractions. I'd rather see data when the certificate is for a different site from the one they're trying to access.
Maybe I'm not paranoid enough, but when I go to the bank's site I type "bankname" in the URL bar and hit CTRL+Enter. The bank's HTTP site redirects me to the HTTPS site. If the DNS had been hijacked and I wasn't paying attention to whether that redirect happened, that could be an attack vector.
Will anyone dare to click on a link labeled "dick"?
Let's see... I don't get the opportunity to spend $629 for something useful, but instead I'm invited to take $399 and throw it away!
I have been mentioning this for years
Yes, I've seen you post here often!
If Edgar Mitchell's involved, then we know for sure that nukes are the best option!
You should really look into Linode. They manage the underlying hardware, and you are the sole root on each of your virtual servers. Loads of bandwidth, cheap per month. I've never heard of them descending into a user's filesystem, because there's no reason to. Management of the virtual server is completely up to you.
Anybody know of a motherboard with HDMI out that supports audio? The closest I've seen is the Asus P5E-VM HDMI, but haven't been able to find anything definitive on HDMI audio support in Linux.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that a cell phone transmitter (having to reach from the phone to the tower) is on the order of one watt, while your Bluetooth headset (having to reach only a few feet) is on the order of one milliwatt.
Which would you rather have up to your head?
That's a spending problem (and a big one), not a revenue problem.
Here: http://www.heritage.org/research/features/BudgetChartBook/fed-rev-spend-2008-boc-R3-Corporate-Income-Tax-Cuts-Boost.html
The trick there is that the small-government people have the best arguments, the best historical and Constitutional support, and the most cruft to chop out, at the federal level.
I'm pretty sure that federal revenue goes up when taxes are cut.
If the government wants to start a program to get more women into science and engineering fields, it should be aimed at young kids.
Okay, but why should it do that? How about presenting kids with a wide range of options for what to do with their lives, and let them decide what's interesting?
I think that's pretty close to what we're doing now, and if that means there aren't many women in engineering, then that's the way it is.
Much of this is finding a way to brute-force the methods used on particular sites, overwhelming randomness, etc. It's not really a computer reading any difficult text.