After reading Thomas's discent, it is even clearer that the court is saying: they can take any land they want, but if it is for public use they must provide just compensation. Private use (such as this case) doesn't require any compensation. (It is of course polite to provide some, but not required)
Intersting article. It however seems to contradict what you are saying. An unconstitutional option is in fact reason to impeach a judge - that is the only power we have to check the judicial branch, other than a constitutional amendment. Since the original amendment is clear, further amendments will not help as the judges will continue to ignore the public use part.
This article has sought to show that the current movement to impeach federal judges for tyrannical behavior is on firm footing.
Depends... Sometimes they will be happy you exposed someone doing that, othertimes they will want to get rid of you. Unless you know ALL the politics (which you don't) there is no way to know. People play nice to those they hate, and they argue violently with their best friends. Good luck figuring out what is what.
Best is to freshen your resume before you reveal anything. Don't keep anything illegal secret though, you could be got on cover up charges.
American's generally speak the English of the old world as it was when they left. In the mean time the English mangled their language into something different. There are people in American who speak English nearly exactly like Shakesphere did when he was writing.
Every once in a while American gets on a reform kick, and does thing like drop the u from color. We can't claim to not mangle the language at all.
What is good and bad? Well that depends. So long as we communicate though don't worry about it.
If that is for historical reason you are smart. PostgreSQL has always been a better database than MySQL. Perl is the old standby for web development. However today Ruby and Python have both proven themselves better languages, in that you have a good chance of reading and understanding your code latter when you need to maintain it. Therefore I have to suggest you evaluate them both, and choose one for jobs that don't have historical reasons to use perl.
Don't waste your time on PHP. It is better than Perl, but not by enough to be worth the pain.
Many people do not realize that supream court justices can be impeached.
Section. 2.
Clause 5: The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
Section. 3
Clause 6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Clause 7: Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
Section. 1.
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Since clearly those 5 justices cannot read, congress has a duty to remove them from their office. I know many of you don't like the idea of Bush choosing 5 justices (perhaps more, there are rumors of retirement), but that is better than letting these 5 sit on then court. Write your congressmen and make it so.
Actually they don't need to be removed from office, just a reminder that the constitution governs this land may be enough.
This solution just uses SMART, which you should be watching anyway. I'm not sure if their product is any good, but you should evaluate it. If it isn't a simple ruby/python script can get that info (We have written such things here). You need to be monitoring each drive anyway, since it is nice to replace them before they fail.
Much as I don't like Microsoft, I have to admit they would to a better job of governing China than the current leaders of China do. Sure they would force everyone with a computer there to run Windows, but they would also shut down all the slave and child labor there. Overall it would be a win for everyone.
Back before the sparc, and after the 68020 sun3, Sun had some i386 machines that you could call wintel. (though nobody used Windows then, and I'm not sure if Dos would run). They also made the sun3x in those days, both of which didn't sell many. (In part because the sparc soon came out, and in those days the sparc killed the 80386.
I'd go on the next shuttle flight if offered a chance. That doesn't make the shuttle less risky. The only reason I'm more likely to die in a car accident than a shuttle accident is I'm unlikely to ever get on a shuttle flight, while I'm one of millions of people who plan on getting in a car again today. I wouldn't get in a car that was as likely to kill me as the next shuttle flight.
About 1 in 50 people who have got on a shuttle are dead because of a shuttle accident. (~ 100 flights, at 6-7 people each, 2 accidents that each killed everyone.). Most people who get in a car do not die in a car accident.
Yes there are risks. Cars are however no where near as dangerous as the space shuttle.
The shuttle has only launched ~100 times. I have driven my car a lot more than 100 times, and I have never lost even one life. Your statistics have been loaded to make your point, but the fact remains ~ 1 in 50 shuttle trips have resulted in people dieing.
It is a bad idea to use technology you do not understand. You never know what they did to it. When you create something yourself you can be sure you won't end up with the worlds largest non-nuclear explosion and fire.
Fortunately this is a patent, not a copyright. It will expire in ~20 years. (I can never recall the rules, but it is 17-20 years depending on a bunch of factors) Most of us are likely to live that long. There is no long history of increasing the length of patent terms over time to keep things patented.
Compare that to copyright. They will last longer than any of us have any hope of living. Everytime they are about to expire they increase the terms, so even things that are "close" to the end of their term are unlikely to get out in our lifetime.
This might or might not be bogus, but at least it will expire and be used by everyone in 20 years.
You can put it in my front yard. It has got to look better out my window than the freeway I look at now. (The freeway is ~ 1/2 mile away, close enough to be ugly, far enough that there is room for a fusion reactor to block that view)
I like the swamps in my backyard, even if they do breed billions of mosquitoes. I I'm technically a NIMBY guy. They can have the front yard though.
Once a month I need to haul something. One a year I take a trip someplace where 4 wheel drive is required. Rental trucks are not allowed to enter 4 wheel drive. (it is against the contract. They might not catch you, but it still isn't allowed) So it is a given that I will have a truck in the driveway. The question is can I justify having a car as well for most of my useage. You have to drive a lot more miles than most people do to make it worth having the car as well.
Even if it took the equivalent of two barrels of oil to get 1, we would still pump it! We have plenty of coal and other power sources that can run pumps (which are often electric, not oil powered). We need oil for the lubricating and plastic production.
We can make synthetic oil and plastics from other sources, but last I checked they were not as good.
1: This is more complex than is seems. Ethanol has less energy than gasoline. (~70BTU vs ~109BTU) However ethanol is also about 108 octane (pump gas is 87-92 depending on the grade). If you assume you will never run on gas you can increase the compression, and get almost as much useable energy out of ethanol, even though your input is less.
No. It will be less (even if you up the compression as I suggested above). However even with standard compression, ethanol burns more efficient than gas, so it won't be 30% less. This assumes that your car was designed to run ethanol. If it wasn't your mixtures will be wrong, and you will blow your engine before you get statistically valid results.
3: I'm not sure. I think less, but I don't know. Gas is pretty volatile itself, and its vapors are more harmful.
4: They are close enough.
5: Not really. Oil for many years was cheaper. In the 1890s gasoline was a byproduct they dumped into the lakes to get rid of (litterally), after separating it from what they wanted. Gas engines were designed to use that waste. Henry Ford designed the model T to use ethanol, but gas really was that much cheaper then that it didn't make sense. Gas is more expensive now (and we know about the environmental effects), so it is time to revisit ethanol.
6: Right now the ethanol market is glutted, and farmers are building more plants. You can assume that if more people used it prices would go up. I estimate that the entire US could move to 25% ethanol over the next 10 years, with little effect on price. Farmers build ethanol plants because they don't need to make money on the plant, so long as they don't loose too much. The additional market for corn makes up for it. Not to mention they need more high protein animal feed, which is a byproduct of ethanol production. 25% ethanol would be enough that the US could stop all imports from OPEC.
Ethanol is not a problem if you car was made anytime since the late 1970s. Cars older than that had problems, but gas often contains 10% ethanol, and that is enough to cause problems. Therefore you can be sure any car on the road will have no problem with ethanol. At least as far as the rubber parts are concerned.
The problem with pure ethanol is you need a different mixture, most fuel injection systems and carburetors are set up for gas, which burns leaner than ethanol. Run E85 in a normal car for long and you will burn holes in your pistons.
Don't forget that biodiesel and ethanol come from different parts of the corn plant. (Substitute your favorite plant) Ethanol is made from sugar/starch. Biodiesel is made from oil. You can extract the oil, without affecting how much sugar/starch is in the product. Then turn the sugar/starch to ethanol.
Don't only is this study heavily biased against ethanol by using outdated data, it ignores the biodiesel production (which is somewhat rare), and that the by products are useful in their own right.
Ethanol alone doesn't need to be energy positive (though it is - if you farm with modern methods), so long as you account for the energy left after producing ethanol.
This isn't the Army anymore. I have never heard that definition of gun before, and civilian useage is gun is the generic term for firearm and can be anything that uses gunpower (sometimes air counts too) to fire a projectile.
My computer analogy is spot on. If you are going to argue that I don't need a gun, then you need to start examining everything you do. My basic needs are food, clothing, and shelter. A gun fits in with that better than a computer.
I have seem people hit 2 inch groups at 50 yards with a pistol. (I can't do it, but that is me, not them) More than one pistol can do that. Not a tiny concealed carry weapon, but a pistol easy to carry on a belt can do that.
A 9mm is known to be short on takedown, that is why Alaska guides carry a bigger pistol when they are in bear country. People do hunt bear with only a pistol. They use a bigger pistol than a 9mm, as you would expect. They also practice with it until they can hit the kill zone at all effective ranges, and they learn to judge distance.
The recoil on a.50 caliber pistol hurts. The biggest pistol I've ever shot was only a 9mm, and it hurt. Not bad, but I felt it.
For a first reading I agree. However if the book is really good I want a hardcover to replace the paperback.
When I know the book is good I'm more willing to take care of it. I know I want to read it again. Unfortunately they don't publish in paperback until after the hardcover is out of print, so I can't get hardcovers when I want them.
Copyright? Do you have any idea of what the subject is? Most of what Penguin publishes as been out of copyright for longer than they have been in business. They have no worry about things falling out of copyright, as their business model is taking books that are no copyrighted, and publishing them as cheaply as they can.
Slashdot Mirror
After reading Thomas's discent, it is even clearer that the court is saying: they can take any land they want, but if it is for public use they must provide just compensation. Private use (such as this case) doesn't require any compensation. (It is of course polite to provide some, but not required)
Intersting article. It however seems to contradict what you are saying. An unconstitutional option is in fact reason to impeach a judge - that is the only power we have to check the judicial branch, other than a constitutional amendment. Since the original amendment is clear, further amendments will not help as the judges will continue to ignore the public use part.
This article has sought to show that the current movement to impeach federal judges for tyrannical behavior is on firm footing.
The law stated public use. This is clearly private use. By your reading no payment at all was required because the land was taken for private use.
Depends... Sometimes they will be happy you exposed someone doing that, othertimes they will want to get rid of you. Unless you know ALL the politics (which you don't) there is no way to know. People play nice to those they hate, and they argue violently with their best friends. Good luck figuring out what is what.
Best is to freshen your resume before you reveal anything. Don't keep anything illegal secret though, you could be got on cover up charges.
American's generally speak the English of the old world as it was when they left. In the mean time the English mangled their language into something different. There are people in American who speak English nearly exactly like Shakesphere did when he was writing.
Every once in a while American gets on a reform kick, and does thing like drop the u from color. We can't claim to not mangle the language at all.
What is good and bad? Well that depends. So long as we communicate though don't worry about it.
If that is for historical reason you are smart. PostgreSQL has always been a better database than MySQL. Perl is the old standby for web development. However today Ruby and Python have both proven themselves better languages, in that you have a good chance of reading and understanding your code latter when you need to maintain it. Therefore I have to suggest you evaluate them both, and choose one for jobs that don't have historical reasons to use perl.
Don't waste your time on PHP. It is better than Perl, but not by enough to be worth the pain.
Many people do not realize that supream court justices can be impeached.
Section. 2.
Section. 3
Section. 1.
Amendment V
Since clearly those 5 justices cannot read, congress has a duty to remove them from their office. I know many of you don't like the idea of Bush choosing 5 justices (perhaps more, there are rumors of retirement), but that is better than letting these 5 sit on then court. Write your congressmen and make it so.
Actually they don't need to be removed from office, just a reminder that the constitution governs this land may be enough.
This solution just uses SMART, which you should be watching anyway. I'm not sure if their product is any good, but you should evaluate it. If it isn't a simple ruby/python script can get that info (We have written such things here). You need to be monitoring each drive anyway, since it is nice to replace them before they fail.
Much as I don't like Microsoft, I have to admit they would to a better job of governing China than the current leaders of China do. Sure they would force everyone with a computer there to run Windows, but they would also shut down all the slave and child labor there. Overall it would be a win for everyone.
Back before the sparc, and after the 68020 sun3, Sun had some i386 machines that you could call wintel. (though nobody used Windows then, and I'm not sure if Dos would run). They also made the sun3x in those days, both of which didn't sell many. (In part because the sparc soon came out, and in those days the sparc killed the 80386.
I'd go on the next shuttle flight if offered a chance. That doesn't make the shuttle less risky. The only reason I'm more likely to die in a car accident than a shuttle accident is I'm unlikely to ever get on a shuttle flight, while I'm one of millions of people who plan on getting in a car again today. I wouldn't get in a car that was as likely to kill me as the next shuttle flight.
About 1 in 50 people who have got on a shuttle are dead because of a shuttle accident. (~ 100 flights, at 6-7 people each, 2 accidents that each killed everyone.). Most people who get in a car do not die in a car accident.
Yes there are risks. Cars are however no where near as dangerous as the space shuttle.
Happens all the time. However praying for something like water to wine isn't something needed religiously, and thus I refuse to do it.
Don't forget when praying for something that the answer can be "no".
The shuttle has only launched ~100 times. I have driven my car a lot more than 100 times, and I have never lost even one life. Your statistics have been loaded to make your point, but the fact remains ~ 1 in 50 shuttle trips have resulted in people dieing.
It is a bad idea to use technology you do not understand. You never know what they did to it. When you create something yourself you can be sure you won't end up with the worlds largest non-nuclear explosion and fire.
Fortunately this is a patent, not a copyright. It will expire in ~20 years. (I can never recall the rules, but it is 17-20 years depending on a bunch of factors) Most of us are likely to live that long. There is no long history of increasing the length of patent terms over time to keep things patented.
Compare that to copyright. They will last longer than any of us have any hope of living. Everytime they are about to expire they increase the terms, so even things that are "close" to the end of their term are unlikely to get out in our lifetime.
This might or might not be bogus, but at least it will expire and be used by everyone in 20 years.
You can put it in my front yard. It has got to look better out my window than the freeway I look at now. (The freeway is ~ 1/2 mile away, close enough to be ugly, far enough that there is room for a fusion reactor to block that view)
I like the swamps in my backyard, even if they do breed billions of mosquitoes. I I'm technically a NIMBY guy. They can have the front yard though.
This example does not apply. In fact it disproves your point. Here is a target that would be easy to take over, yet nobody has.
Once a month I need to haul something. One a year I take a trip someplace where 4 wheel drive is required. Rental trucks are not allowed to enter 4 wheel drive. (it is against the contract. They might not catch you, but it still isn't allowed) So it is a given that I will have a truck in the driveway. The question is can I justify having a car as well for most of my useage. You have to drive a lot more miles than most people do to make it worth having the car as well.
Even if it took the equivalent of two barrels of oil to get 1, we would still pump it! We have plenty of coal and other power sources that can run pumps (which are often electric, not oil powered). We need oil for the lubricating and plastic production.
We can make synthetic oil and plastics from other sources, but last I checked they were not as good.
1: This is more complex than is seems. Ethanol has less energy than gasoline. (~70BTU vs ~109BTU) However ethanol is also about 108 octane (pump gas is 87-92 depending on the grade). If you assume you will never run on gas you can increase the compression, and get almost as much useable energy out of ethanol, even though your input is less.
No. It will be less (even if you up the compression as I suggested above). However even with standard compression, ethanol burns more efficient than gas, so it won't be 30% less. This assumes that your car was designed to run ethanol. If it wasn't your mixtures will be wrong, and you will blow your engine before you get statistically valid results.
3: I'm not sure. I think less, but I don't know. Gas is pretty volatile itself, and its vapors are more harmful.
4: They are close enough.
5: Not really. Oil for many years was cheaper. In the 1890s gasoline was a byproduct they dumped into the lakes to get rid of (litterally), after separating it from what they wanted. Gas engines were designed to use that waste. Henry Ford designed the model T to use ethanol, but gas really was that much cheaper then that it didn't make sense. Gas is more expensive now (and we know about the environmental effects), so it is time to revisit ethanol.
6: Right now the ethanol market is glutted, and farmers are building more plants. You can assume that if more people used it prices would go up. I estimate that the entire US could move to 25% ethanol over the next 10 years, with little effect on price. Farmers build ethanol plants because they don't need to make money on the plant, so long as they don't loose too much. The additional market for corn makes up for it. Not to mention they need more high protein animal feed, which is a byproduct of ethanol production. 25% ethanol would be enough that the US could stop all imports from OPEC.
Ethanol is not a problem if you car was made anytime since the late 1970s. Cars older than that had problems, but gas often contains 10% ethanol, and that is enough to cause problems. Therefore you can be sure any car on the road will have no problem with ethanol. At least as far as the rubber parts are concerned.
The problem with pure ethanol is you need a different mixture, most fuel injection systems and carburetors are set up for gas, which burns leaner than ethanol. Run E85 in a normal car for long and you will burn holes in your pistons.
Don't forget that biodiesel and ethanol come from different parts of the corn plant. (Substitute your favorite plant) Ethanol is made from sugar/starch. Biodiesel is made from oil. You can extract the oil, without affecting how much sugar/starch is in the product. Then turn the sugar/starch to ethanol.
Don't only is this study heavily biased against ethanol by using outdated data, it ignores the biodiesel production (which is somewhat rare), and that the by products are useful in their own right.
Ethanol alone doesn't need to be energy positive (though it is - if you farm with modern methods), so long as you account for the energy left after producing ethanol.
This isn't the Army anymore. I have never heard that definition of gun before, and civilian useage is gun is the generic term for firearm and can be anything that uses gunpower (sometimes air counts too) to fire a projectile.
My computer analogy is spot on. If you are going to argue that I don't need a gun, then you need to start examining everything you do. My basic needs are food, clothing, and shelter. A gun fits in with that better than a computer.
I have seem people hit 2 inch groups at 50 yards with a pistol. (I can't do it, but that is me, not them) More than one pistol can do that. Not a tiny concealed carry weapon, but a pistol easy to carry on a belt can do that.
A 9mm is known to be short on takedown, that is why Alaska guides carry a bigger pistol when they are in bear country. People do hunt bear with only a pistol. They use a bigger pistol than a 9mm, as you would expect. They also practice with it until they can hit the kill zone at all effective ranges, and they learn to judge distance.
The recoil on a .50 caliber pistol hurts. The biggest pistol I've ever shot was only a 9mm, and it hurt. Not bad, but I felt it.
For a first reading I agree. However if the book is really good I want a hardcover to replace the paperback.
When I know the book is good I'm more willing to take care of it. I know I want to read it again. Unfortunately they don't publish in paperback until after the hardcover is out of print, so I can't get hardcovers when I want them.
Copyright? Do you have any idea of what the subject is? Most of what Penguin publishes as been out of copyright for longer than they have been in business. They have no worry about things falling out of copyright, as their business model is taking books that are no copyrighted, and publishing them as cheaply as they can.