While your points are solid, here at the USPTO we pride ourselves in granting patents regardless of originality, gross obviousness and indeed, patentability itself.
We like to think of ourselves as a progressive institution.
Yes it is likely. We are expected to believe that a single consumer grade device caused the simultaneous failure of both engines? Or from high powered sources which the planes must be built and certified to withstand. Give me a break. A Computer/Hardware glitch is a far more plausible cause.
That said, my paranoia meter says this could have been caused by some nut near the airfield with a HERF Gun.
I really feel sorry for a bunch of people who will post here. I mean, what can you say to someone whose first video game experience was "Super Mario Brothers 3"?
That my first video game experience was "Super Mario Bros."
You high and mighty young'uns with your fancy schamcy raccoon tails, and your hoi-poloi giant worlds, and your la-de-dah world maps. In my day we had two power ups; mushrooms and fire flowers, and we were happier for it.... in fact, because of it!
Back in those days, kids had discipline. We had to go through 15 levels before we were allowed to use the pause button, and if you were caught using warp pipes, well sir, you'd get a good whack upside the head for your trouble, and you'd better have been thankful for it.
1) The law was unjust. 2) She had good reason for breaking it.
The OP felt that the new law would be unjust, and stated that if it is passed, when he purchases alcohol, he will use a fake barcode on his ID.
To compare properly with the Rosa Parks case we must ask; is the legal requirement for ID barcodes unjust, and secondly, does the OP have good reason to go to such lengths to break it. Personally, even as a teetotaller, I think the law is unjust, adding as it does a layer of intimidating surviellance to what is still a perfectly legal right. As to the second question, while some may regard alcohol purchasing as a luxury/frivolity, I see no reason why this matter should be regarded as somehow lesser than the purchase of books or cars or guns or food. Applying this scheme to purchases for sex toys would probably raise more eyebrows and condemnations, but they are no less, and probably even more of, a luxury item.
In reality, it should be shopkeepers and store managers protesting these measures, not customers. However, in our reality, purchases are made from massive multinationals interesting in keeping the government sweet more so than their customers anonymous.
i'll say it again: the greatest threat to democracy in the 21st century is electronic voting
Unquestionably.
Electronic voting is the greatest threat democracies have faced since the second world war. The entire basis of our system of government, "One man, one vote" is fundamentally undermined when no one can actually see their vote being counted. A computerized tally does not count your votes. It count a digital abstraction of your vote, and abstraction that can be altered and changed on a whim, yet is still regarded as concrete.
Computer counting is a black box. Would you be satisfied if paper votes were counted by in sealed warehouses with blacked out windows? Would you be happy if government/company officials emerged from this edifice after a few days and simply declared the winner? Then why are people happy with computerized counting? It gives the same degree of scrutiny and trustworthiness, if not less.
And as for paper receipts, what a joke. The secrecy of our ballots is almost as important as each of us having just one of them. Paper receipts from e-voting booths mean that people can sell their vote to the highest bidder, and we'll be straight into a plutocracy.
I feel that the only reason people support e-voting is because they naively believe it to be more "modern" and "sophisticated". And of course the only reason governments support it is not because it is cheaper, it isn't, but because they can rig the vote.
It's obvious that the Republican's who control the voting machines have altered the vote wholesale in these primaries in an effort to make sure the less electable Clinton is chosen as the Democratic candidate. I'd wager the results presented are entirely fabricated ones, prepared in advance, and in reality have absolutely nothing to do with the publics supposed votes, which in reality amounted to precisely nothing more than registered voters pushing some buttons and walking home, their voices unheard.
Didn't anyone see that Heroes episode? A determined team of black hats could accomplish all that easily enough, and with enough noise in the ballots to make fraud statistically fiendish to detect.
E-vote tampering is not science fiction. It's an inevitable fact.
Maybe you should pick up a dictionary or a thesaurus and learn that, lo and behold, you don't have to use the F-word every two sentences to get your point across.
It's true that you don't have to swear to get your point across. But sometimes, it really fucking helps.
You can only wonder how many systems the people claiming Nintendo is manufacturing this shortage think are being produced.
OK, I think I've got it.
Let "certain group"="the people claiming Nintendo is manufacturing this shortage"
Then the sentence was "You can only wonder how many systems certain group think are being produced."
I think the better way to state the sentence would have been: "You can only wonder how many systems are thought to have been produced, by the people claiming Nintendo is manufacturing this shortage.".
Innocent? Sex before marriage is shameful, sinful and a crime in the eyes of God. Every good Christian knows these people deserve to suffer for the rest of their lives.
Some people live next to swamps withs alligators. They manage by taking appropriate measures such as proper fencing and keeping their eye on small children.
Of course, some take a different kind of initiative by going out into the swamp and shooting everything that floats, crawls or looks like an alligator in any way.
The difference between alligators and sex offenders is that alligators have laws protecting them.
Slashdot Mirror
While your points are solid, here at the USPTO we pride ourselves in granting patents regardless of originality, gross obviousness and indeed, patentability itself.
We like to think of ourselves as a progressive institution.
And why not? That clout is for sale!
That said, my paranoia meter says this could have been caused by some nut near the airfield with a HERF Gun.
That my first video game experience was "Super Mario Bros."
You high and mighty young'uns with your fancy schamcy raccoon tails, and your hoi-poloi giant worlds, and your la-de-dah world maps. In my day we had two power ups; mushrooms and fire flowers, and we were happier for it.... in fact, because of it!
Back in those days, kids had discipline. We had to go through 15 levels before we were allowed to use the pause button, and if you were caught using warp pipes, well sir, you'd get a good whack upside the head for your trouble, and you'd better have been thankful for it.
Great days.
I'm sorry, but you appear to have responded in the wrong thread.
Rosa Parks broke the law for two reasons:
1) The law was unjust.
2) She had good reason for breaking it.
The OP felt that the new law would be unjust, and stated that if it is passed, when he purchases alcohol, he will use a fake barcode on his ID.
To compare properly with the Rosa Parks case we must ask; is the legal requirement for ID barcodes unjust, and secondly, does the OP have good reason to go to such lengths to break it. Personally, even as a teetotaller, I think the law is unjust, adding as it does a layer of intimidating surviellance to what is still a perfectly legal right. As to the second question, while some may regard alcohol purchasing as a luxury/frivolity, I see no reason why this matter should be regarded as somehow lesser than the purchase of books or cars or guns or food. Applying this scheme to purchases for sex toys would probably raise more eyebrows and condemnations, but they are no less, and probably even more of, a luxury item.
In reality, it should be shopkeepers and store managers protesting these measures, not customers. However, in our reality, purchases are made from massive multinationals interesting in keeping the government sweet more so than their customers anonymous.
Damn straight they'll buy it. The price will be your continued well being.
Unquestionably.
Electronic voting is the greatest threat democracies have faced since the second world war. The entire basis of our system of government, "One man, one vote" is fundamentally undermined when no one can actually see their vote being counted. A computerized tally does not count your votes. It count a digital abstraction of your vote, and abstraction that can be altered and changed on a whim, yet is still regarded as concrete.
Computer counting is a black box. Would you be satisfied if paper votes were counted by in sealed warehouses with blacked out windows? Would you be happy if government/company officials emerged from this edifice after a few days and simply declared the winner? Then why are people happy with computerized counting? It gives the same degree of scrutiny and trustworthiness, if not less.
And as for paper receipts, what a joke. The secrecy of our ballots is almost as important as each of us having just one of them. Paper receipts from e-voting booths mean that people can sell their vote to the highest bidder, and we'll be straight into a plutocracy.
I feel that the only reason people support e-voting is because they naively believe it to be more "modern" and "sophisticated". And of course the only reason governments support it is not because it is cheaper, it isn't, but because they can rig the vote.
It's obvious that the Republican's who control the voting machines have altered the vote wholesale in these primaries in an effort to make sure the less electable Clinton is chosen as the Democratic candidate. I'd wager the results presented are entirely fabricated ones, prepared in advance, and in reality have absolutely nothing to do with the publics supposed votes, which in reality amounted to precisely nothing more than registered voters pushing some buttons and walking home, their voices unheard.
His braces haven't been installed yet.
Your wife is a closet gossip, and needs to seek professional help.
Our maths is fine. It's our assumptions that need checking.
Didn't anyone see that Heroes episode? A determined team of black hats could accomplish all that easily enough, and with enough noise in the ballots to make fraud statistically fiendish to detect.
E-vote tampering is not science fiction. It's an inevitable fact.
Unkempt flannel wearing emo. It's an important distinction.
And that people, is the textbook definition of irony!
And So He Must Die.
Fool! For every one you strike down, two more will take his place!
Opportunity is like raw feces. It draws vermin.
Are you joking? Tabs rock! I'd rate them as the most useful innovation in web browsing in the last ten years. Easily.
You could make the case for XMLHttpRequest, but a lot of pages, in fact most of the best ones, don't use AJAX.
OK, I think I've got it.
Let "certain group"="the people claiming Nintendo is manufacturing this shortage"
Then the sentence was "You can only wonder how many systems certain group think are being produced."
I think the better way to state the sentence would have been: "You can only wonder how many systems are thought to have been produced, by the people claiming Nintendo is manufacturing this shortage.".
Over forty Mega-Fonzies!
With Microsoft Windows Server 2008, chairs practically throw themselves!
Innocent? Sex before marriage is shameful, sinful and a crime in the eyes of God. Every good Christian knows these people deserve to suffer for the rest of their lives.
Some people live next to swamps withs alligators. They manage by taking appropriate measures such as proper fencing and keeping their eye on small children.
Of course, some take a different kind of initiative by going out into the swamp and shooting everything that floats, crawls or looks like an alligator in any way.
The difference between alligators and sex offenders is that alligators have laws protecting them.