Just some food for thought. If you agree that any right explicitly protected in the US Constitution can be ignored and/or restricted then you are also agreeing that ANY right explicitly protected in the US Constitution can be ignored and/or restricted.
Your not supposed to cherry pick what parts of the Constitution you uphold and protect. You uphold and protect ALL of it, warts and all.
If people don't like part of it then they should support an amendment to alter/revoke that part, but until the amendment goes into effect they should follow the Constitution as it is. Like it or not.
Another thing that people forget is that the Constitution doesn't grant any rights, everyone already has "Freedom of speech" and the rest. The Constitution is meant to put limits on what the US government can do, nothing more.
no mater how good the sensors are they are only going to be useful if they have *time* to work. Even if the sensors picked up the pedestrian the moment they stepped into the street it still takes a finite amount of time to bring 3000lbs of car to a stop from any speed. A 25mph a car is going ~36 feet per second. Step out 6ft in front.of said car and it will have.2 seconds to come to a complete halt. Keep in mind the car doesn't have to hit you all that hard to kill. Just knock you down, your head hitting the pavement might be what kills you.
"Every major OS includes a web browser these days, BUT a web browser cannot on its own extract any usable data from the raw blockchain binary blobs."
Every major browser can not on its own open raw jpeg files either. They need a DLL or equivalent to do so.
Given how gun ho some USA prosecutors are when it comes to showing how "tough on crime" they are around election time, or just because they are assholes who think they ARE the law I would not be so quick to disregard this. I mean they prosecuted some guy for possession of child porn over a manga image (SFW).
I'm sure during the 1930s many of the German people felt the same about the Brownshirts and didn't do anything. We all know how well that worked don't we?
The TSA are capable of extrajudicial action that affects the lives and freedoms of people, and not just US Citizens. Better to speak now while we still have a voice than watch silently as another nation falls into tyranny.
Whether an executive order from Obama to shut down Gitmo would have been challenged is IRRELEVANT to the fact that he did not issue such an order. He didn't even try.
As a Constitutional scholar he should have known that holding anyone indefinitely and without trial was a violation of the Constitution and that, despite what some claim, the rights mentioned in the Constitution are meant to apply to all people, not just American citizens.
And also on that note Obama issued Executive Orders almost as many time as G.W.Bush. (Obama 276, Bush 291)
Every other right in the Bill of Rights is an individual's right, yet by some strange magic that always neatly falls under ideological lines, the 2nd somehow becomes a group right by mention of a militia.
Lets try parsing the 2nd a bit shall we?
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," Subordinate, participial clause. Absolutely meaningless without-
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed Main clause. Very clear, very direct, very not open to interpretation.
Or how about putting the 2nd into a less emotionally charged context?
A well balanced breakfast, being necessary to the health of the nation, the right of the people to keep and eat cereal, shall not be infringed.
So, who has the right to eat cereal: a well-balanced breakfast, or the people?
Most of the preceding text is not mine but from comments made by other posters on various forums over the years.
My view:
It always amazes me that the people who scream that we should just ignore the 2nd amendment are the very same people who would be screaming about their right to free speech, or their right to not have their homes searched without a warrant, or their right not be held without trial being ignored by anyone else.
You don't like the 2nd, fine, the 1st protects your right to express your opinion. But if you want to overturn the 2nd then you need to push for a 28th Amendment that just states "The 2nd amendment no longer applies." That is all it would have to say. And when that happens I will give up the.22 rifle my father gave me when I turned 15, as his father had given it to him, and I will turn in the shotgun my wife used to protect herself and our family from an intruder.
But until that happens you don't get to pick and choose what parts of the Constitution you get to follow anymore than any other person can. I will continue to seek to uphold and defend the Constitution, as a whole, against all threats foreign and domestic. Even if it means wasting time dealing with people like you.
This is the first thing to come from the Trump White House that I actually think might be a good idea.
I'd rather see the ISS in orbit under the care of private companies who might actually to something really interesting with it than see it become a pretty light show in the sky.
I remember reading an article many, many, years ago that made exactly that connection. I think it was early 1990's, might have been in Time or The Wall Street Journal.
The males in Islamic counties who see little to no chance of ever getting a wife/mate because the rich/powerful have first dibs will be desperate enough that when they are told that if they fight Jihad and die a martyrs death you get, not just one, but 72 women (and virgins to boot) as your brides/consorts. In a culture that puts so much emphasis on male children and measures your worth as a person by how many wives you have this makes it easy to get people who are willing to die for whatever ideology you are pushing as long as they get the women.
While the electricity to charge the ship might be from coal at the moment there are three huge advantages to an electric shipping vessel.
First being that an electric ship doesn't care where it gets the electricity from so it can be charged from what ever source is available, be it solar, wind, nuclear, petroleum diesel, gas or coal. with the alternatives being switched into service as available without needing to refit the ship.
The second, and in my view best, advantage of an electric ship is that it moves the pollution source from a moving point source with limited area for emission scrubbers to a fixed point emission source with plenty of room for scrubbers that can deal with the soot, CO2 and other exhaust gases of whatever fuel is being used.
Third, there is no longer a risk of diesel fuel being spilled into the river should the ship be damaged.
Same things can be said about any electric vehicle.
There is a perfect alternative to guns though, it's simply banning them. They serve no purpose.
Sounds like a great idea! Lets ban ALL guns. Hunters who feed there families, hobbyists/collectors who never actually use them, home/shop owners who want to protect family/property, body guards, security, police, secret service, military, everyone. If you concede that even a single person/organization should keep their guns for any reason then you admit that sometimes a gun does have a purpose. Guns are tools, nothing more. They do not load themselves, walk into a school room full of children and pull their own trigger. If the killer at Sandyhook had thrown pipe bombs into the classrooms would you be calling for the banning of plumbing supplies as well? Once a person decides to kill someone else they will find a way, it is the desire to kill that must be addressed, not which tool they choose to use.
There won't be mass shootings.
but there will still be mass killings. Oklahoma City 1995 (120+ dead), New York 2001 (3000+ dead), Nice 2016 (86 dead 400+ injured). Gikondo 1994 (110 dead) to name some off the top of my head. No guns used in any of those mass killings, for almost every mass killing involving guns I can cite one just as bad where guns were not used. Even if guns vanished with a wave of a magic wand people will still find a way to kill others. We need to focus on changing the culture and mind sets that consider violence an acceptable answer to a disagreement.
Long answer: There is no reason whatsoever to connect a TV/display device to the Internet. Only exception would be if there was a serious flaw in the firmware that actually prevented the TV from working as a TV and the update can not be done from a USB storage device. In that case you connect the cable, update, and disconnect.
A simple HTPC (Home Theater PC) can do Youtube, Hulu, Netflix, etc., and it's OS is far more likely to get regular and timely security and software updates, unlike a TV. You can replace/upgrade the hardware/software easily and without costing a bundle (usually). And you have far more control over what the HTPC does and what software is installed than the embedded system in your TV. Plus you can add features that are unavailable with the TV's firmware.
On a personal note I will never own a TV, or other "commodity" device, that requires an internet connection to function and except for the limited exception noted above my TV, dishwasher, refrigerator, etc. will never be connected to the Internet.
An eCig may not have most of the crap (tar, etc.) a normal cig has but it still has nicotine, and I would rather not have to inhale the stuff if I can avoid it.
If you want to ingest a highly addictive and deadly drug fine by me. Just don't do it in an aerosol form around people who have chosen not to ingest the aforementioned drug.
The rulers of Dubai have a long history of spending their money on things like this. Consider the idea to bring icebergs from the Antarctic as a source of fresh water, then there was the plan to build artificial islands that look like the continents of the world, and many, many more that made for great PR talking points and gets them into the world news but were never finished, and never will be.
I'd be more worried about an Antarctic super volcano causing the land bound ice to melt. The resulting sea level rise would affect things on a global scale unlike the ash fallout.
Consider that even though the odds of winning a large lottery is something on the odds of 1:127,000,000* yet people still win the big jackpots fairly often.
So claiming that the odds are against something happening are astronomically against it occurring doesn't mean that it doesn't happen surprisingly often.
* last probability I remember hearing, it's probably even worse for some, better for others.
More wasted money and effort trying to reinvent the wheel.
If the nations of the world pooled their resources, funding and expertise into a single space program Humanity could have a self sustaining colony on both the moon and Mars within 15 years.
But no.
Instead Australia is going to spend how much money trying to get a "home grown" launch vehicle working? And how much more again to get an Australian into space on a rocket built in Australia by Australians?
I wish Australia luck, seriously. Maybe they will figure out how to do something better than anyone else has yet and everyone else will also benefit from it. But things could be so much better if the Nations of Earth worked together on developing space.
As it is I don't expect a human to walk on Mars within my lifetime, about 23 years if the actuarial table are right. Hells, even getting a back to the moon might be too much to ask. Never mind something awesome like an actual permanently maned base on the moon within that time. I mean really, when was the last time any Human went beyond LEO?
Slashdot Mirror
Just some food for thought. If you agree that any right explicitly protected in the US Constitution can be ignored and/or restricted then you are also agreeing that ANY right explicitly protected in the US Constitution can be ignored and/or restricted.
Your not supposed to cherry pick what parts of the Constitution you uphold and protect. You uphold and protect ALL of it, warts and all.
If people don't like part of it then they should support an amendment to alter/revoke that part, but until the amendment goes into effect they should follow the Constitution as it is. Like it or not.
Another thing that people forget is that the Constitution doesn't grant any rights, everyone already has "Freedom of speech" and the rest. The Constitution is meant to put limits on what the US government can do, nothing more.
clips on the suitable applications of high explosives
no mater how good the sensors are they are only going to be useful if they have *time* to work. Even if the sensors picked up the pedestrian the moment they stepped into the street it still takes a finite amount of time to bring 3000lbs of car to a stop from any speed. A 25mph a car is going ~36 feet per second. Step out 6ft in front.of said car and it will have .2 seconds to come to a complete halt. Keep in mind the car doesn't have to hit you all that hard to kill. Just knock you down, your head hitting the pavement might be what kills you.
"Every major OS includes a web browser these days, BUT a web browser cannot on its own extract any usable data from the raw blockchain binary blobs."
Every major browser can not on its own open raw jpeg files either. They need a DLL or equivalent to do so.
Given how gun ho some USA prosecutors are when it comes to showing how "tough on crime" they are around election time, or just because they are assholes who think they ARE the law I would not be so quick to disregard this. I mean they prosecuted some guy for possession of child porn over a manga image (SFW).
"Do not mess with them."
I'm sure during the 1930s many of the German people felt the same about the Brownshirts and didn't do anything. We all know how well that worked don't we?
The TSA are capable of extrajudicial action that affects the lives and freedoms of people, and not just US Citizens. Better to speak now while we still have a voice than watch silently as another nation falls into tyranny.
Whether an executive order from Obama to shut down Gitmo would have been challenged is IRRELEVANT to the fact that he did not issue such an order. He didn't even try.
As a Constitutional scholar he should have known that holding anyone indefinitely and without trial was a violation of the Constitution and that, despite what some claim, the rights mentioned in the Constitution are meant to apply to all people, not just American citizens.
And also on that note Obama issued Executive Orders almost as many time as G.W.Bush. (Obama 276, Bush 291)
People!
Could we please stop calling police and other LEOs "Pigs"?
To the best of my knowledge no member of the species Sus (includes boar, warthog, etc.) has ever done anything to deserve that kind of insult.
Call the TSA and LEO's what they are: "Brownshirts"
Every other right in the Bill of Rights is an individual's right, yet by some strange magic that always neatly falls under ideological lines, the 2nd somehow becomes a group right by mention of a militia.
.22 rifle my father gave me when I turned 15, as his father had given it to him, and I will turn in the shotgun my wife used to protect herself and our family from an intruder.
Lets try parsing the 2nd a bit shall we?
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," Subordinate, participial clause. Absolutely meaningless without-
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed Main clause. Very clear, very direct, very not open to interpretation.
Or how about putting the 2nd into a less emotionally charged context?
A well balanced breakfast, being necessary to the health of the nation, the right of the people to keep and eat cereal, shall not be infringed.
So, who has the right to eat cereal: a well-balanced breakfast, or the people?
Most of the preceding text is not mine but from comments made by other posters on various forums over the years.
My view:
It always amazes me that the people who scream that we should just ignore the 2nd amendment are the very same people who would be screaming about their right to free speech, or their right to not have their homes searched without a warrant, or their right not be held without trial being ignored by anyone else.
You don't like the 2nd, fine, the 1st protects your right to express your opinion. But if you want to overturn the 2nd then you need to push for a 28th Amendment that just states "The 2nd amendment no longer applies." That is all it would have to say. And when that happens I will give up the
But until that happens you don't get to pick and choose what parts of the Constitution you get to follow anymore than any other person can. I will continue to seek to uphold and defend the Constitution, as a whole, against all threats foreign and domestic. Even if it means wasting time dealing with people like you.
This is the first thing to come from the Trump White House that I actually think might be a good idea.
I'd rather see the ISS in orbit under the care of private companies who might actually to something really interesting with it than see it become a pretty light show in the sky.
I remember reading an article many, many, years ago that made exactly that connection. I think it was early 1990's, might have been in Time or The Wall Street Journal.
The males in Islamic counties who see little to no chance of ever getting a wife/mate because the rich/powerful have first dibs will be desperate enough that when they are told that if they fight Jihad and die a martyrs death you get, not just one, but 72 women (and virgins to boot) as your brides/consorts. In a culture that puts so much emphasis on male children and measures your worth as a person by how many wives you have this makes it easy to get people who are willing to die for whatever ideology you are pushing as long as they get the women.
1. It's some kind of Starseed
2. It's a sentient organic star ship like Gomtuu
3. its something totally natural but really, really, really weird that is going to have people discussing/arguing over what it is for years to come.
My moneys on 3, but 1 and 2 are more fun to think about.
Did they also work out the environmental impact of all the cute kitten, epic fail, stupid human tricks, vBlogs, etc., videos as well?
Bet it is much, much higher than just porn.
I'd rather power lines than one of the other things the Japanese media are obsessed with.
Bunny girls?
While the electricity to charge the ship might be from coal at the moment there are three huge advantages to an electric shipping vessel.
First being that an electric ship doesn't care where it gets the electricity from so it can be charged from what ever source is available, be it solar, wind, nuclear, petroleum diesel, gas or coal. with the alternatives being switched into service as available without needing to refit the ship.
The second, and in my view best, advantage of an electric ship is that it moves the pollution source from a moving point source with limited area for emission scrubbers to a fixed point emission source with plenty of room for scrubbers that can deal with the soot, CO2 and other exhaust gases of whatever fuel is being used.
Third, there is no longer a risk of diesel fuel being spilled into the river should the ship be damaged.
Same things can be said about any electric vehicle.
so, what happens when the sea level rises? or a tsunami? Are they building it on stilts?
There is a perfect alternative to guns though, it's simply banning them. They serve no purpose.
Sounds like a great idea! Lets ban ALL guns. Hunters who feed there families, hobbyists/collectors who never actually use them, home/shop owners who want to protect family/property, body guards, security, police, secret service, military, everyone. If you concede that even a single person/organization should keep their guns for any reason then you admit that sometimes a gun does have a purpose. Guns are tools, nothing more. They do not load themselves, walk into a school room full of children and pull their own trigger. If the killer at Sandyhook had thrown pipe bombs into the classrooms would you be calling for the banning of plumbing supplies as well? Once a person decides to kill someone else they will find a way, it is the desire to kill that must be addressed, not which tool they choose to use.
There won't be mass shootings.
but there will still be mass killings. Oklahoma City 1995 (120+ dead), New York 2001 (3000+ dead), Nice 2016 (86 dead 400+ injured). Gikondo 1994 (110 dead) to name some off the top of my head. No guns used in any of those mass killings, for almost every mass killing involving guns I can cite one just as bad where guns were not used. Even if guns vanished with a wave of a magic wand people will still find a way to kill others. We need to focus on changing the culture and mind sets that consider violence an acceptable answer to a disagreement.
Reader's Digest version answer: Oh Hells NO.
Long answer:
There is no reason whatsoever to connect a TV/display device to the Internet. Only exception would be if there was a serious flaw in the firmware that actually prevented the TV from working as a TV and the update can not be done from a USB storage device. In that case you connect the cable, update, and disconnect.
A simple HTPC (Home Theater PC) can do Youtube, Hulu, Netflix, etc., and it's OS is far more likely to get regular and timely security and software updates, unlike a TV. You can replace/upgrade the hardware/software easily and without costing a bundle (usually). And you have far more control over what the HTPC does and what software is installed than the embedded system in your TV. Plus you can add features that are unavailable with the TV's firmware.
On a personal note I will never own a TV, or other "commodity" device, that requires an internet connection to function and except for the limited exception noted above my TV, dishwasher, refrigerator, etc. will never be connected to the Internet.
Good.
An eCig may not have most of the crap (tar, etc.) a normal cig has but it still has nicotine, and I would rather not have to inhale the stuff if I can avoid it.
If you want to ingest a highly addictive and deadly drug fine by me. Just don't do it in an aerosol form around people who have chosen not to ingest the aforementioned drug.
The rulers of Dubai have a long history of spending their money on things like this. Consider the idea to bring icebergs from the Antarctic as a source of fresh water, then there was the plan to build artificial islands that look like the continents of the world, and many, many more that made for great PR talking points and gets them into the world news but were never finished, and never will be.
I'd be more worried about an Antarctic super volcano causing the land bound ice to melt. The resulting sea level rise would affect things on a global scale unlike the ash fallout.
Your agument against isn't much better.
Consider that even though the odds of winning a large lottery is something on the odds of 1:127,000,000* yet people still win the big jackpots fairly often.
So claiming that the odds are against something happening are astronomically against it occurring doesn't mean that it doesn't happen surprisingly often.
* last probability I remember hearing, it's probably even worse for some, better for others.
couldn't we just send Trumpf instead?
Are you crazy? That would be seen as an act of war by almost every sentient in the Galaxy.
More wasted money and effort trying to reinvent the wheel.
If the nations of the world pooled their resources, funding and expertise into a single space program Humanity could have a self sustaining colony on both the moon and Mars within 15 years.
But no.
Instead Australia is going to spend how much money trying to get a "home grown" launch vehicle working? And how much more again to get an Australian into space on a rocket built in Australia by Australians?
I wish Australia luck, seriously. Maybe they will figure out how to do something better than anyone else has yet and everyone else will also benefit from it. But things could be so much better if the Nations of Earth worked together on developing space.
As it is I don't expect a human to walk on Mars within my lifetime, about 23 years if the actuarial table are right. Hells, even getting a back to the moon might be too much to ask. Never mind something awesome like an actual permanently maned base on the moon within that time. I mean really, when was the last time any Human went beyond LEO?
"So how many hits did it take ..."
The world may never know.
I was thinking the same thing.
Colossus:The Forbin Project