Phone companies want to keep the things the general public granted them, but not give up anything back to the general public in return. Any "right of way" they were previously granted should be stripped from them, and then we'll see how well they do in an actual competitive environment.
The public never granted right of way. The companies purchased it. Securing "right of way" is sometimes the most difficult (and in certain parts of the country expensive) part of laying fiber. Mineral rights can work in the same way.
Of course, those cables are run over, under, and through other people's property -- namely, other people's real estate. The phone companies were granted the right to do this, even if the owners of the real estate didn't want it there, because the public utility of having a phone network was deemed too important
Wrong again. You most likely do not own the mineral rights to your property. In the same vein, you do not own that right of way. In some counties here in Oklahoma, the entire mineral rights are owned by an Indian tribe. The property rights of a landowner (who is not a member of that tribe) go approximately 6 inches deep.
When you purchase property, it is up to you to review your deed, title, and contract to see what is yours and what isn't. If you aren't satisfied, don't buy that property.
This regulation of forcing the baby bells to share their networks at cost is killing the large telecom companies. You know, the ones that laid the fiber in the first place, invested all that money, and employ many more people.
These "virtual" phone companies that ride the carriers _at_cost_ have been largely responsible for part of the telecom bust. It's the same model as Enron. Selling things that you don't actually own or maintain. If something goes wrong, you have to pay the carrier $$$ to get it fixed.
A few months ago slashdot was bitching about why cable was clobbering DSL and was taking over broadband, and there would be no more competition. Do you want to know why? The reason is that SBC (in my area of the country) is forced to give up their lines ANY TIME SOMEONE WANTS TO USE THEM, for free (at cost, but that bandwith is lost to SBC).
If you want real broadband competition you cannot cripple the companies doing the investment into the network of DSL.
Cable companies do not have to share their lines. The telecom deregulation act did some good, some bad. (We got worldcom and a bust, but attributing everything to that is not the best idea.)
I get long distance for 5cents a minute, and may soon switch to MCI for unlimited local and long distance calling.
Don't whine about access to a network you never built!
In Germany (and quite possibly France) you pay close to 2/3 of your income in taxes (even if it isn't directly income tax). Germany is moving more and more towards a welfare state since the end of the Cold War. This is party why there is such a rift between the US and Germany on Iraq. The cultures are different, the priorities are different, and the choices have been different. I don't consider paying 2/3 of my income into taxes a "workers paradise," but then again I'm an American.
Treaties are never intended to be "until all time," even if that is what the wording says. A country enters into a treaty because it sees a benefit to doing so. If the treaty stops being a benefit, or worse, causes a harm, that country has an OBLIGATION to withdraw from it. Remember a government is only accountable to its own citizens, not the rest of the world. That might sound unfair, but gunboat diplomacy usually works.
Another side note: if Congress empowers the President to do this, we have ALREADY backed out of that treaty. Reference the Supreme Court "Cherokee Tabacco Case". The Supreme Court ruled that laws passed by Congress supercede any previous treaties.
You are comparing apples to oranges. In Taiwan, you have a large population packed into a very small area. The population density is just unheard of here in the United States. The United States has 270 million (thereabouts) of people spread out across half a continent.
The article talks about using existing copper more efficiently. It also goes on to say how Congress seems to ignore these innovations. If just laying tons of fiber was the solution, why is there all this dark fiber in the ground?
The "last mile" (the connection from the home to the central office) is always the most expensive to upgrade. Many connections are old and in rural areas won't support more than 28.8kbps. The question the article poses is simple...is fiber to the home the solution?
In my area at least, the cable company does not have a monopoly. I live in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where SBC and Cox cable have been duking it out for about 2 years now.
Cox is winning, for the most part, because SBC is more heavily regulated. SBC has offered some nice all-in-one packages (local phone, long distance with 1000 free minutes 7 cents a min after, wireless, dsl, and voicemail) for about $100.
Also you say that highways are the same as water and power. This isn't true in the USA. Highways are the sole responsibilty of the government. Water and power are regulated as natural monopolies (in the vast majority of the country this is a better setup than having 3 water companies to choose from.) Depending on your state, these could be heavily regulated or regulated little. In my state, Oklahoma, we have a very tough Corporation Commission (read: PUC.) Just recently they forced both SBC and Oklahoma Natural Gas to give refunds for overcharging (from not buying at the lowest rate possible.)
Yes, something very ugly is going on the the US telecom market. Here we call it the killing fields. (WorldCom's largest headquarters is in Tulsa.) We also recently lost Williams Communications and dozens of small startup firms. There was an article posted on slashdot about 6 months ago how the telecoms overbuilt drastically over demand (Worldcom spreading lies about how much demand there actually was, and the telecoms buying into it.)
Right now we are in an adjustment. Things are shaking down. Recessions are good for this because it makes companies be more responsible and more profitable. It is painful (I can't find a job now) but has to happen from time to time.
Seriously, this was an actual case that the Supreme Court ruled on. I know because when I had (boring as hell) Oklahoma history, the Oklahoma governor at the time called out the national guard to shut the toll collection down (Texas was trying to get tolls).
Labeling a tax "use" instead of sales does not mean it isn't a sales tax. If the purchase crosses state lines (and the company does not have a physical presence in you state) IT CANNOT BE TAXED BY THE STATE.
It may be taxed by the federal government. There are many MANY supreme court cases (from the 19th century) and also one from the 1930s. Interstate trade my not be regulated (read:taxed) by any state government.
Its the same reason you cannot have a toll bridge operated by one state that crosses say, the Red River between Texas and Oklahoma (that is the case I'm referring to in the 1930s.)
The only reason you are paying a "use tax" is because nobody has bothered to fight it. If you think of what a "use tax" is, they are charging a tax for you to "use" your own property.
those are all suppositions. do you have actual evidence to bakc up those claims?
you say that a person who lives outside their means might succumb to bribery...that is an outrageous claim and I hope you can back that up. I recently lost my job and had to live on credit cards for a while. That now makes me more vunerable to bribery?
I really think you are stretching here. Before you draw links make sure you have evidence. Thats why this whole thing is unethical. Because people like you can draw erroneous conclusions about someone.
That is simply not true. A check is neutral. Where did you get this bad information? Negative scores only come from late payments, large open debts, and extended dillenquencies.
Positives include paying off a large debt (on time), low debt/income ratio, and home ownership.
First question you should ask the CEO, is can they prove a direct link between bad credit and stealing from the company?
Next up: they should be aware that they cannot have you sign one sheet of paper that authorizes them to run a credit check on existing employees anytime they wish. By law, each and every credit check requires a separate signature.
Also advise them that the purpose of a credit check is to note your credit worthiness when BORROWING money. Most contracts and most employers prohibit you from borrowing money from the company. Tell them you will sign a credit release if they will allow you to borrow money. Legitimate credit checks can be run by banks, car dealerships, cell phone companies (that aren't pre-paid, you are in essence borrowing money until your payment is due.)
I would also contact your District Attorney's office and your State Attorney General.
Also, if they ask you to list your traffic tickets, REFUSE if the job does not involve any driving. This is an illegal question.
Employers try to get away with lots of illegal questions just because no one says no.
I think you are missing the point here. The military doesn't want civilian WiFi interfering with radar in any shape or form to keep nasty things from happening, ie planes colliding, messed up radar guided ILS landing, etc. They also don't want to have to deal with any "ghosting" (I just made that term up so don't whale on me for misusing it) in case of a suicide attack or something similar.
Of course our enemies are going to do their best to cause harm to military aircraft. I don't mind giving up a few bands on the spectrum to help insure there isn't an accident (figher plane crashing into my house and the like.
Microwave ovens (radar research) the worlds first electronic computer (for calculating artillery angles and trajectories) the Internet (linking not only colleges and campuses, but military bases. The old original internet can still withstand a nuclear strike) Pennicilin (an attempt to keep soldiers alive longer after being wounded, discovered via accident during this process) Rocketry (advanced greatly by the Germans in WWII) Most advances in radio technology and aeronautics were out of necessity during wars....and the list goes on and on. My personal opinion is that it is wonderful that we are able to take devices and inventions originally used to destroy and kill and turn them into things that better our quality of life.
Space flight is dangerous. I hate to sound cold and calloused, but any time you put a human being inside a machine with hundreds of thousands working parts and fly several times the speed of sound, the risk is just HUGE.
This brings up another question: why are we still using shuttles? Shuttles are almost 30 years old, are extremely expensive to operate, and do little to further man's exploration of space. (You may say that we save money because the shuttle is recyclable, but you are dead wrong. It takes more money to relaunch the shuttle than it does to build a rocket, have that rocket burn up on re-entry, then build that rocket over again from scratch.)
I just hope this doesn't halt space missions for 5 or 6 years like Challenger did.
Likeness is irrelevant, as long as the codebase is different. Remember when Apple sued M$ for infringement? Apple said that M$ stole the look and feel, but M$ was able to prove the underlying code was different. The court sided with M$ (and this is back in the day when M$ wasn't all that gigantic)
It's called an alpha...ever hear of it? I know its being killed of, but it is the grandest microprocessor ever built. The funny thing is my chip is only 533mhz, 21164 EV56 (oldddd chip). It has 8MB of cache.
SRM is what we use because we have no other choice. Yes you can save a configuration, but it does very little in the way of setting up the system the way most OS's expect (including Linux). It only supports a very small number of video cards made in the last 3 years, and has extremely limited boot options. Oh, lets not forget that we haven't seen major revisions of it (supporting new hardware) in years...
You talk about configuring SRM? Sure, you can set it to autoboot on powerup, set a password, but that is about all you can do with it. SRM is a dinosaur, one that we unfortunately have to deal with for the time being. From your statements, methinks you do not know what you are talking about, and are just a troll.
Have you ever actually *used* an Alpha? One of the best parts of the x86 is the BIOS itself. The x86 bios initializes cards, sets IRQs, and supports tons or boot hardware.
Alphas do NOT use Openboot. Installing linux generally requires SRM, which has very little hardware support. On most Alphas, you cannot boot from an onboard IDE hard device. I own a PC164LX and run RedHat on it. One reason for the lack of device support in linux is because the drivers expect certain things to be done automatically by the bios (for instance, initialization.)
If you want to learn more about the bios, or lack thereof, on an alpha, you can try
this link
Register your gun in the database? Hmmm, that flies in the face of many private property across state lines provisions. I can buy a gun in my state, Oklahoma (with no registry), and take it to New Jersey, and there isn't anything the state goverment of New Jersey can do to force me to register that gun. If it is legal to own in one state, I can carry it across state lines to another. (It's why while firework purchases may be illegal on one state, if you bought them in another state, it is not illegal to OWN them.)
Really, people should read the Constitution before letting their state government do whatever it damn well pleases.
Our case was built on the notion that copyright, as the Framers of the Constitution envisioned it
While I think your attempt was noble, I believe it was misplaced. You state you are looking for what the "Framers of the Constitution" wanted? If you read the constitution, the Framers did not want a strong judiciary. In fact, Thomas Jefferson was so appalled when John Marhsall illegally decided judical review was the court's power he stated, "In the hands of the Judicary, the Constitution is but a ball of wax, to be molded and shaped to their desires."
Surprisingly, I agree with the decision. The responsibility for changing bad laws is Congress. Congress is the branch empowered to write laws, and also the branch responsible for changing laws. Even if you grant the Supreme Court the ability to strike down unconstitutional laws, there must be a *clear* and *direct* violation. Any amount of time is not "infinite", even if it is _practically_infinite_.
You speak as though the effort is over. Why not spend your energy now on educationg members of Congress on why this is a bad law and get it repealled? In essence, this is what the Supreme Court is telling you. There is a new house majority leader taking office this very month. If you don't try, you never will know if it will succeed.
It's amazing how all of the posters who bash Bush just spew ignorant propaganda. The so-called facts you present are nothing more than attack-dog lies. Next time do your research before lying about someone. (The pollution attacks are borderline libellous.)
Everyone should take a look at the article in Newsweek "To Walk on Mars." It was in the July issue of 1996 (or somewhere around there. I'm positive it is the July issue.)
The article outlines the failures of NASA to actually do anything significant. Most people forget that space exporation is as much about PR as it is science. NASA continues to ignore real opportunities... we have the technology RIGHT NOW to send a manned mission to Mars, but instead, NASA insisted on building a financial black hole of a space station, and when it's finished, won't get us any closer to Mars.
The space shuttle is an excellent example of NASA's stupidity and incompetence. It costs more to launch something in orbit with the space shuttle, recycle the space shuttle, and reuse it, than it costs to build a *brand new rocket*, have the rocket launch, burn up completely on re-entry, then build a *brand new rocket* all over again.
NASA's new launch vehicle, by NASA's own estimates, won't be ready for another 20 years. This has prompted many private companies to develop cheap lauch vehicles because they are TIRED OF WAITING ON NASA!
People have a hard time getting behind little robot probes exploring space. The real progress comes with manned spaceflight. The country (and the whole human race) can rally behind a manned mission. Yes, it is much harder to send a man into space than a robot, but that is the entire point. Because it is harder, we learn more and develop new technologies to make it possible.
Isn't manned flight what NASA was created for in the first place?
NASA's refusal to work within budgets and to ignore manned spaceflight and solve its problems of sticking with bad technologies has led to this problem. If you want someone to blame, blame NASA, its their own fault.
Not to mention that the Internet was developed with *our* tax dollars
This is only true if you are talking about the old internet, the one used by the DoD and the defense industry. That baby was designed for national security and can withstand a nuclear strike. However, the modern internet, optical fiber based, was developed by the major telecommunications companies to increase voice traffic. Data traffic was originally secondary. I seriously doubt the companies like Cisco, Alcatel, and Lucent were using tax dollars to develop their products.
and depends 100% on open standards and protocols
Um, wrong again. Open standards don't really exist in networking or in telecommunications. Every vendor does things differently. The OSI model is NOT widely used and each vendor has its own implementation of what they want to do. Remember IPX? TCP/IP has finally taken over and dominated networking as Novell will now allow a server to run on solely TCP/IP.
Slashdot Mirror
Phone companies want to keep the things the general public granted them, but not give up anything back to the general public in return. Any "right of way" they were previously granted should be stripped from them, and then we'll see how well they do in an actual competitive environment.
The public never granted right of way. The companies purchased it. Securing "right of way" is sometimes the most difficult (and in certain parts of the country expensive) part of laying fiber. Mineral rights can work in the same way.
Of course, those cables are run over, under, and through other people's property -- namely, other people's real estate. The phone companies were granted the right to do this, even if the owners of the real estate didn't want it there, because the public utility of having a phone network was deemed too important
Wrong again. You most likely do not own the mineral rights to your property. In the same vein, you do not own that right of way. In some counties here in Oklahoma, the entire mineral rights are owned by an Indian tribe. The property rights of a landowner (who is not a member of that tribe) go approximately 6 inches deep.
When you purchase property, it is up to you to review your deed, title, and contract to see what is yours and what isn't. If you aren't satisfied, don't buy that property.
This regulation of forcing the baby bells to share their networks at cost is killing the large telecom companies. You know, the ones that laid the fiber in the first place, invested all that money, and employ many more people.
These "virtual" phone companies that ride the carriers _at_cost_ have been largely responsible for part of the telecom bust. It's the same model as Enron. Selling things that you don't actually own or maintain. If something goes wrong, you have to pay the carrier $$$ to get it fixed.
A few months ago slashdot was bitching about why cable was clobbering DSL and was taking over broadband, and there would be no more competition. Do you want to know why? The reason is that SBC (in my area of the country) is forced to give up their lines ANY TIME SOMEONE WANTS TO USE THEM, for free (at cost, but that bandwith is lost to SBC).
If you want real broadband competition you cannot cripple the companies doing the investment into the network of DSL.
Cable companies do not have to share their lines. The telecom deregulation act did some good, some bad. (We got worldcom and a bust, but attributing everything to that is not the best idea.)
I get long distance for 5cents a minute, and may soon switch to MCI for unlimited local and long distance calling.
Don't whine about access to a network you never built!
In Germany (and quite possibly France) you pay close to 2/3 of your income in taxes (even if it isn't directly income tax). Germany is moving more and more towards a welfare state since the end of the Cold War. This is party why there is such a rift between the US and Germany on Iraq. The cultures are different, the priorities are different, and the choices have been different. I don't consider paying 2/3 of my income into taxes a "workers paradise," but then again I'm an American.
Treaties are never intended to be "until all time," even if that is what the wording says. A country enters into a treaty because it sees a benefit to doing so. If the treaty stops being a benefit, or worse, causes a harm, that country has an OBLIGATION to withdraw from it. Remember a government is only accountable to its own citizens, not the rest of the world. That might sound unfair, but gunboat diplomacy usually works.
Another side note: if Congress empowers the President to do this, we have ALREADY backed out of that treaty. Reference the Supreme Court "Cherokee Tabacco Case". The Supreme Court ruled that laws passed by Congress supercede any previous treaties.
You are comparing apples to oranges. In Taiwan, you have a large population packed into a very small area. The population density is just unheard of here in the United States. The United States has 270 million (thereabouts) of people spread out across half a continent.
The article talks about using existing copper more efficiently. It also goes on to say how Congress seems to ignore these innovations. If just laying tons of fiber was the solution, why is there all this dark fiber in the ground?
The "last mile" (the connection from the home to the central office) is always the most expensive to upgrade. Many connections are old and in rural areas won't support more than 28.8kbps. The question the article poses is simple...is fiber to the home the solution?
In my area at least, the cable company does not have a monopoly. I live in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where SBC and Cox cable have been duking it out for about 2 years now.
Cox is winning, for the most part, because SBC is more heavily regulated. SBC has offered some nice all-in-one packages (local phone, long distance with 1000 free minutes 7 cents a min after, wireless, dsl, and voicemail) for about $100.
Also you say that highways are the same as water and power. This isn't true in the USA. Highways are the sole responsibilty of the government. Water and power are regulated as natural monopolies (in the vast majority of the country this is a better setup than having 3 water companies to choose from.) Depending on your state, these could be heavily regulated or regulated little. In my state, Oklahoma, we have a very tough Corporation Commission (read: PUC.) Just recently they forced both SBC and Oklahoma Natural Gas to give refunds for overcharging (from not buying at the lowest rate possible.)
Yes, something very ugly is going on the the US telecom market. Here we call it the killing fields. (WorldCom's largest headquarters is in Tulsa.) We also recently lost Williams Communications and dozens of small startup firms. There was an article posted on slashdot about 6 months ago how the telecoms overbuilt drastically over demand (Worldcom spreading lies about how much demand there actually was, and the telecoms buying into it.)
Right now we are in an adjustment. Things are shaking down. Recessions are good for this because it makes companies be more responsible and more profitable. It is painful (I can't find a job now) but has to happen from time to time.
Seriously, this was an actual case that the Supreme Court ruled on. I know because when I had (boring as hell) Oklahoma history, the Oklahoma governor at the time called out the national guard to shut the toll collection down (Texas was trying to get tolls).
The Supreme Court ruled in Oklahoma's favor.
Labeling a tax "use" instead of sales does not mean it isn't a sales tax. If the purchase crosses state lines (and the company does not have a physical presence in you state) IT CANNOT BE TAXED BY THE STATE.
It may be taxed by the federal government. There are many MANY supreme court cases (from the 19th century) and also one from the 1930s. Interstate trade my not be regulated (read:taxed) by any state government.
Its the same reason you cannot have a toll bridge operated by one state that crosses say, the Red River between Texas and Oklahoma (that is the case I'm referring to in the 1930s.)
The only reason you are paying a "use tax" is because nobody has bothered to fight it. If you think of what a "use tax" is, they are charging a tax for you to "use" your own property.
those are all suppositions. do you have actual evidence to bakc up those claims?
you say that a person who lives outside their means might succumb to bribery...that is an outrageous claim and I hope you can back that up. I recently lost my job and had to live on credit cards for a while. That now makes me more vunerable to bribery?
I really think you are stretching here. Before you draw links make sure you have evidence. Thats why this whole thing is unethical. Because people like you can draw erroneous conclusions about someone.
That is simply not true. A check is neutral. Where did you get this bad information? Negative scores only come from late payments, large open debts, and extended dillenquencies.
Positives include paying off a large debt (on time), low debt/income ratio, and home ownership.
This is direct from my credit union loan officer.
First question you should ask the CEO, is can they prove a direct link between bad credit and stealing from the company?
Next up: they should be aware that they cannot have you sign one sheet of paper that authorizes them to run a credit check on existing employees anytime they wish. By law, each and every credit check requires a separate signature.
Also advise them that the purpose of a credit check is to note your credit worthiness when BORROWING money. Most contracts and most employers prohibit you from borrowing money from the company. Tell them you will sign a credit release if they will allow you to borrow money. Legitimate credit checks can be run by banks, car dealerships, cell phone companies (that aren't pre-paid, you are in essence borrowing money until your payment is due.)
I would also contact your District Attorney's office and your State Attorney General.
Also, if they ask you to list your traffic tickets, REFUSE if the job does not involve any driving. This is an illegal question.
Employers try to get away with lots of illegal questions just because no one says no.
I think you are missing the point here. The military doesn't want civilian WiFi interfering with radar in any shape or form to keep nasty things from happening, ie planes colliding, messed up radar guided ILS landing, etc. They also don't want to have to deal with any "ghosting" (I just made that term up so don't whale on me for misusing it) in case of a suicide attack or something similar.
Of course our enemies are going to do their best to cause harm to military aircraft. I don't mind giving up a few bands on the spectrum to help insure there isn't an accident (figher plane crashing into my house and the like.
Damned straight!
....and the list goes on and on. My personal opinion is that it is wonderful that we are able to take devices and inventions originally used to destroy and kill and turn them into things that better our quality of life.
Microwave ovens (radar research)
the worlds first electronic computer (for calculating artillery angles and trajectories)
the Internet (linking not only colleges and campuses, but military bases. The old original internet can still withstand a nuclear strike)
Pennicilin (an attempt to keep soldiers alive longer after being wounded, discovered via accident during this process)
Rocketry (advanced greatly by the Germans in WWII)
Most advances in radio technology and aeronautics were out of necessity during wars
Space flight is dangerous. I hate to sound cold and calloused, but any time you put a human being inside a machine with hundreds of thousands working parts and fly several times the speed of sound, the risk is just HUGE.
This brings up another question: why are we still using shuttles? Shuttles are almost 30 years old, are extremely expensive to operate, and do little to further man's exploration of space. (You may say that we save money because the shuttle is recyclable, but you are dead wrong. It takes more money to relaunch the shuttle than it does to build a rocket, have that rocket burn up on re-entry, then build that rocket over again from scratch.)
I just hope this doesn't halt space missions for 5 or 6 years like Challenger did.
Likeness is irrelevant, as long as the codebase is different. Remember when Apple sued M$ for infringement? Apple said that M$ stole the look and feel, but M$ was able to prove the underlying code was different. The court sided with M$ (and this is back in the day when M$ wasn't all that gigantic)
it is on chip. i think you dont know what you are talking about.
It's called an alpha...ever hear of it? I know its being killed of, but it is the grandest microprocessor ever built. The funny thing is my chip is only 533mhz, 21164 EV56 (oldddd chip). It has 8MB of cache.
SRM is what we use because we have no other choice. Yes you can save a configuration, but it does very little in the way of setting up the system the way most OS's expect (including Linux). It only supports a very small number of video cards made in the last 3 years, and has extremely limited boot options. Oh, lets not forget that we haven't seen major revisions of it (supporting new hardware) in years...
You talk about configuring SRM? Sure, you can set it to autoboot on powerup, set a password, but that is about all you can do with it. SRM is a dinosaur, one that we unfortunately have to deal with for the time being. From your statements, methinks you do not know what you are talking about, and are just a troll.
Have you ever actually *used* an Alpha? One of the best parts of the x86 is the BIOS itself. The x86 bios initializes cards, sets IRQs, and supports tons or boot hardware.
Alphas do NOT use Openboot. Installing linux generally requires SRM, which has very little hardware support. On most Alphas, you cannot boot from an onboard IDE hard device. I own a PC164LX and run RedHat on it. One reason for the lack of device support in linux is because the drivers expect certain things to be done automatically by the bios (for instance, initialization.)
If you want to learn more about the bios, or lack thereof, on an alpha, you can try this link
Register your gun in the database? Hmmm, that flies in the face of many private property across state lines provisions. I can buy a gun in my state, Oklahoma (with no registry), and take it to New Jersey, and there isn't anything the state goverment of New Jersey can do to force me to register that gun. If it is legal to own in one state, I can carry it across state lines to another. (It's why while firework purchases may be illegal on one state, if you bought them in another state, it is not illegal to OWN them.)
Really, people should read the Constitution before letting their state government do whatever it damn well pleases.
ack, i meant ... Senate Majority Leader
While I think your attempt was noble, I believe it was misplaced. You state you are looking for what the "Framers of the Constitution" wanted? If you read the constitution, the Framers did not want a strong judiciary. In fact, Thomas Jefferson was so appalled when John Marhsall illegally decided judical review was the court's power he stated, "In the hands of the Judicary, the Constitution is but a ball of wax, to be molded and shaped to their desires."
Surprisingly, I agree with the decision. The responsibility for changing bad laws is Congress. Congress is the branch empowered to write laws, and also the branch responsible for changing laws. Even if you grant the Supreme Court the ability to strike down unconstitutional laws, there must be a *clear* and *direct* violation. Any amount of time is not "infinite", even if it is _practically_infinite_.
You speak as though the effort is over. Why not spend your energy now on educationg members of Congress on why this is a bad law and get it repealled? In essence, this is what the Supreme Court is telling you. There is a new house majority leader taking office this very month. If you don't try, you never will know if it will succeed.
It's amazing how all of the posters who bash Bush just spew ignorant propaganda. The so-called facts you present are nothing more than attack-dog lies. Next time do your research before lying about someone. (The pollution attacks are borderline libellous.)
Everyone should take a look at the article in Newsweek "To Walk on Mars." It was in the July issue of 1996 (or somewhere around there. I'm positive it is the July issue.)
The article outlines the failures of NASA to actually do anything significant. Most people forget that space exporation is as much about PR as it is science. NASA continues to ignore real opportunities... we have the technology RIGHT NOW to send a manned mission to Mars, but instead, NASA insisted on building a financial black hole of a space station, and when it's finished, won't get us any closer to Mars.
The space shuttle is an excellent example of NASA's stupidity and incompetence. It costs more to launch something in orbit with the space shuttle, recycle the space shuttle, and reuse it, than it costs to build a *brand new rocket*, have the rocket launch, burn up completely on re-entry, then build a *brand new rocket* all over again.
NASA's new launch vehicle, by NASA's own estimates, won't be ready for another 20 years. This has prompted many private companies to develop cheap lauch vehicles because they are TIRED OF WAITING ON NASA!
People have a hard time getting behind little robot probes exploring space. The real progress comes with manned spaceflight. The country (and the whole human race) can rally behind a manned mission. Yes, it is much harder to send a man into space than a robot, but that is the entire point. Because it is harder, we learn more and develop new technologies to make it possible.
Isn't manned flight what NASA was created for in the first place?
NASA's refusal to work within budgets and to ignore manned spaceflight and solve its problems of sticking with bad technologies has led to this problem. If you want someone to blame, blame NASA, its their own fault.
This is only true if you are talking about the old internet, the one used by the DoD and the defense industry. That baby was designed for national security and can withstand a nuclear strike. However, the modern internet, optical fiber based, was developed by the major telecommunications companies to increase voice traffic. Data traffic was originally secondary. I seriously doubt the companies like Cisco, Alcatel, and Lucent were using tax dollars to develop their products.
and depends 100% on open standards and protocols
Um, wrong again. Open standards don't really exist in networking or in telecommunications. Every vendor does things differently. The OSI model is NOT widely used and each vendor has its own implementation of what they want to do. Remember IPX? TCP/IP has finally taken over and dominated networking as Novell will now allow a server to run on solely TCP/IP.
Lets get real people.
---
We must find the Goldilocks zone.