there are all kinds of things that the government is allowed to do that we would -never- be allowed to do... Your comparison doesn't hold up, because the situation is quite different.
The situation is only different if you believe that government's power is a mandate from god or a rule by military force, however if you believe that the government is granted it's powers by the people, then the people in fact do have those self same powers. After all we are the ones granting them, so we must first posses them ourselves. The government can levy a tax in order to provide services, I can invoice for services rendered. The government can wage war, I can kill in self defense. You say "allowed" like our rights and liberties are something that are granted by the Constitution,they are not. Our rights are inherent in being human.(even the right observed by the Fourth Amendment) As I've said before, the difference between "allowed" and an inherent human right is central to a free society.
So, rather than copy music like mad and try to use this defence in court when caught, you might want to protest against this, call your representative or whatnot. Might be a whole lot more effective.
I agree. I meant to say that I would like to see that defense used in already existing cases as a form of protesting the absurdity of this policy.
So if the Supreme Court has agreed to this and the Customs agents are making copies "for security", then the Supreme Court has ruled that making a digital copy is not stealing. When customs searches my bag, they don't get to keep anything form it unless there is something legal there. SO if they are allowed to make a copy, and that doesn't count as seizure of my property, then my digital copy of some music or a movie isn't theft either because I didn't seize any property. I hope EFF uses this in an RIAA case. The best way to take on a bad policy like this is to apply it to as many things as possible. I wonder if I can make a copy of what is on the customs office computer, if having a digital copy isn't a seziure of property.
Well, the good news is that at least that most of the people getting paid to run this war are American citizens.
Umm, until recently The Carlyle Group was heavily invested in by the Saudi bin Laden family, and Halliburton has built an HQ in Dubai. So no, the middle eastern elite are profiting just as much from this war as the US defense and oil elite.
That article was written when oil was a little over $60 a barrel, Today it's $87 a barrel, so I forgot to include one other group that was war profiteering: everyone in the oil business. Which largely comprised of the people in charge on both sides of this war. How can you hope for peace when the leaders of both sides are making huge profits because of the war?
Most people who are bright enough to see how much money is being wasted, aren't US Citizens so they don't mind at all.
Oh we see it and we mind, but you seem to think that we are actually in a position to do anything about it. Protests don't do anything when they are made from a First Amendment Zone. We voted our sorry excuse for an opposition party into power and they didn't stop the war. We have attempted to legally address the the deception that paved the way for this war in the first place (see my sig) but that hasn't even appeared in our evening news on a slow news day. None of our viable candidates for the next presidency are willing to pull the troops out. You seem to suffer from the misconception that Americans actually have any control or accountability from our government.
How many million a day is it? I cant figure out where the money is going.
Given how unpopular the war in Iraq is here in America, it would make sense that the US military would want to keep that knowledge from anti-American Iraqis. It's got to be hard to justify your presence as soldier on foreign soil when there is obvious that even your homeland doesn't believe you should be there. If the US military is going to have any hopes of changing the Iraqi culture it would be in their interests to control what information the Iraqi people have.
Then what could possibly be the point? If people weren't willing to pay for the Concorde, why do people think they'll be willing to pay even more for this?
That depends on if they are aiming this at a super luxury market or trying to make it a more mainstream product. There is a higher disparity in wealth distribution today than there was in the 70's and 80's. So if this is solely for wealthiest 0.5% then perhaps there is a way to make it cost effective. $100,000 ticket prices might make it work. But I agree that there seems little chance of mainstream success given what happened with the Concorde.
you should probably leave that science to someone much better at it.
Yes, because the all the money and energy spent on string theory has delivered such wonderfully useful real world applications... I'm not against scientists exploring counter intuitive ideas like: the 11 or so dimensions in string theory or mystical forms of matter with completely foreign properties that only exist in the great depths of space. I am against having public or university funds and energies spent on these things, especially when there are so many branches of science that have just as much if not more potential to improve life and are far less fantastical.
ok here's a test for this theory, produce some of this "phantom matter" So me something with negative mass, I'll use it to build anti-gravity devices and he will have all the research funding he ever needs.
How long till this, in some form, is used to increase breast size? It seems growing a jaw would be more difficult than growing new/more breast tissue, and they would be "real".
Women with real breasts larger than a D-cup frequently seek breast reduction surgery, natural breast tissue isn't strong enough to support that much weight in an aesthetically appealing way. When science comes up with a way to make a 40 year old's natural breasts perky again, then plastic surgeons will have to rethink their business model.
So can they be sued for false advertising if they have a commercial that shows more than four people watching football together? If it is illegal to "use their product" in that way, are beer commercials that show large numbers of people over at a person's house enjoying the game together promoting copyright violation?
It's quite possible to be Islamic and not follow Sharia
Now that really depends on which Muslims you ask. Unfortunately the Muslims who feel that proper Islam requires Sharia Law are also much more prone to enforcing their religious views with physical force. They may even be in the minority in many places, but they are the vocal, violent minority. So yes, "it's possible to be Jewish and not follow all 613 laws in the Torah" but it is also possible to do so in Israel without being beaten, maimed, or executed.
That is one of the things that so many people fail to understand. You cannot give a country democracy. When a critical mass of people in the country are free within their own minds then they will take steps to become free. Then we can jump in and help. If the people are not mentally/culturally ready for democracy then it won't work. They will just vote who they are told to vote for by their imam,priest,televangelist,newscaster,celebrity. We have a different level of the same problem here in the US, people vote based on their emotions and we end up making some really stupid national political decisions as well.
A judge pleading "oh but it's out of my hands, the murder must got free" is exactly the kind of words games I am talking about. Yes, the legislature is at fault as well, but to say that they are "my elected officials" implies that I had a worthy option available to me on the ballot. When there is a candidate running that will gut the bloated pile of bullshit that is our code of law, then you can say that they are "my elected official". When there is a candidate on the ballot who steps up and admits that the War on Drugs is more damaging to our society than the drugs themselves, then there could be "my elected offical". If good lawyers and thoughtful voting could solve the problems of our broken governmental system, then why are we in such a sorry state? We have per capita, four times the number of people in prison than the European average. and over three and a half times the murder rate. Our legal/government system is broken, but very profitable to the people in charge of it. How do you think it will change if not through violent reformation by the people who have been failed by that system? Do you think that people and institutions that have gained a great deal of power are going to willingly surrender their excesses? I would be all for a peaceful solution, but if I try to put economic pressure on the government, they will eventually send men with guns to haul me away or simply seize my bank account. The soap box and the ballot box have failed; the jury box isn't looking very promising (see my sig). Unfortunately all that leaves is the ammo box. Please point out a non-violent way will get results, because when I look at the direction of our country I don't see a place I would want to have children in.
However, I don't think that the answer is bloodshed; try contributing to groups like Public Citizen and the Electronic Frontier Foundation who are trying to protect our rights.
So you are suggesting that the solution for the problem of lawyers is more lawyers? Sorry, but no that is not the solution. Mainly because it only strengthens the in hold that legal speak has over common sense. Letting a murder go because someone forgot to say "simon says" is a crime in and of itself and should be treated accordingly. With malatov cocktails and hunting rifles. Seriously, if more people are going to be allowed to die because of a slimebag lawyer and judge who bows to word games then it should be that judge and that lawyer and those murders who die. I'm not encouraging day to day vigilantes, but just like when your car breaks down you have to get out and push, when they legal/government system breaks down the public has to step out side the normal social agreement and replace the broken parts. I know that sounds harsh, but there are always lives at stake it's just usually the lives of the average citizens in the courtroom. When most people go into a court room it's because there is something life changingly serious going on. Lawyers who play word games with people's lives are just as damaging to a harmonious society as thieves and murderers.
The was your friends fault. I agree that lawyers are scum but your friends should have done some more research.
Did they have to hire a lawyer to get married? Did they have to fly far away or do a lot of research? Why should they have to do those things to reverse it? The legal system is designed by lawyers for lawyers, justice and service to the people has take a back seat. Face it, when you have known criminals getting out on a technicality, it's not about justice or preventing further crime, it's about word games with the legal code. This couple suffered from the same thing, it was quite obvious to everyone what was intended, but they didn't play the word game right so now they have to pay.
These guys will be smashed into paste by hordes of the highest paid lawyers on planet Earth first thing Monday morning.
Are you talking about the patent troll or the dipshit patent officers who let this slide or both? The patent officers should be held responsible for what could be severely damaging neglect it their duties. The patent troll should have all other patents seriously reviewed, and if found to be abusing the patent system they should lose all patents and the right to make future patents. Make that apply to the individuals involved, not just the corporation. As long as the only damages coming from abusing the patent system are monetary, then abuse is just a matter of figuring the odds and trying to find loopholes in the law. Abusers should simply be removed from the system.
It's pretty easy when you look at the vote tallies for your county and see that the candidate you voted for is showing zero votes. That makes it obvious that the original count is wrong. It's difficult to spot shifting vote numbers once the numbers get higher, which is why we need UN election oversight. This is a measure we insist on in other countries but yet refuse in our own. Uncertainty is when you vote is being counted by black box machines made by a company that employs know felons in key management areas. Strangely the people put in power by this voting system, don't want the system to change, funny that. True election reform which would break us out of our dysfunctional two party system, such as approval voting or instant runoff voting will never pass through a legislature put in power by a strong two party system. Uncertainty is when 56% of the population doesn't even show up to vote, because they do not feel represented by either of the two available choices.
They're citizens, and people just as you are. You really think most of the armed forces are going to unload their stuff on their own people, because they're ordered to do so?
The exact same is true of the soldiers under Stalin and of the soldiers at Tiananmen Square. Yes, people do what at they are told to do by an authority. The unquestioning following of orders is one of the primary focuses of training a soldier. It's not a difficult thing to convince a soldier that you are the enemy, and terms like "homegrown terrorist" are already being used by our government. What could that be about other than mentally preparing large numbers of Americans to treat other Americans as the enemy and therefore less than human.
the most appropriate synonym for "well-regulated" in the 17th and 18th centuries would be "effective" in the 21st century.
But that begs the question, maintain a militia effective against what? The answer of course is that it is intended to allow for a militia effective against a government that oversteps it's bounds. However in odrer to be effective against the current government, not only would the gun control laws against fully automatic adn assault rifles have to be revoked, but people/militias would have to be legally be allowed to keep and practice with things like rocket propelled grenades. But as the much lauded rarely seen American spirit of Independence has vanished from our cultural mindset, so has the idea that we should maintain the ability to over throw our own government. In short, the more people actually believe the lie "The pen is mightier.
than the sword" the more they have forgotten "Power flows from the barrel of a gun". The people who are spending 15% of every one of your paychecks on a war machine want you to go on thinking that rallies and op-ed pieces are as effective as "a well regulated militia". Do you really think that if millions of Americans were actually empowered to forcibly protect their rights, that we submit to The Patriot Act, Patriot Act II, etc?
It has been pointed out that the private industry side of this is the exciting part, which does have some value, but I think the "joyride" part actually has more. Sure this is just for the very rich, right now. Airplanes used to be only for the very rich as well. Virgin Galactic will make space accessible to the public. Right now space is only something cold and functional, for the military and billion dollar businesses. This makes space fun and exciting, not for the lucky Air Force pilot turned astronaut, but for everyone who will now get to go there. That, more than and return mission to the moon or man on Mars will make people put a higher priority on Space exploration and travel. Virgin Galactic isn't about function, but about fun. Like porn on the internet it will pave the way for Space travel to grow much faster that it would under government and industry alone.
"Bong hits for Jesus" is the perfect example of just how over-controlling schools are becoming. Frederick, then a senior, was off school property when he hoisted the banner but was suspended for violating the school's policy of promoting illegal substances at a school-sanctioned event. So in the eternal bloating of government, students are now subject to the law of the school board even when they are not on school property. The fact that it was a "school sanctioned event" is irrelevant. The kid wasn't being disruptive to the schools activities he was being harmlessly disruptive to the Olympic torch passing. If you think that qualifies as a reasonable restriction you need to snap out of your sheep's mentality. Rights, like free speech, are not something that the government "allows". They are inherent to all humans, in places they are repressed by governments, in places they are repressed by cultures, but they always there. The difference is not trivial. In fact it is central to a free society.
Dude, ATHF is a well know terrorist organization. It is unamerican of you to support them through your viewership. Every time you watch that show it is an insult to the hard working patriots in the Department of Homeland Security.
This is the first time I've heard of a handicapped person being discriminated against because they're too good.
I expect it won't be the last. As tech progresses, artificial replacement parts become better at a much faster rate than human biology improves. I would not be surprised if, with-in the next ten years, there will be hearing aids that connect directly to the auditory nerve and are better than human ears. Maybe 20 years until "Geordi LaForge" style replacement eyes. As the science and technology surrounding the interfacing of the nervous system and technology improves so will the potential capabilities of the people with that interface. The is little reason that and artificial limb wouldn't be stronger and more damage resistant than the flesh and blood limb it replaces.
Slashdot Mirror
there are all kinds of things that the government is allowed to do that we would -never- be allowed to do... Your comparison doesn't hold up, because the situation is quite different.
The situation is only different if you believe that government's power is a mandate from god or a rule by military force, however if you believe that the government is granted it's powers by the people, then the people in fact do have those self same powers. After all we are the ones granting them, so we must first posses them ourselves. The government can levy a tax in order to provide services, I can invoice for services rendered. The government can wage war, I can kill in self defense. You say "allowed" like our rights and liberties are something that are granted by the Constitution,they are not. Our rights are inherent in being human.(even the right observed by the Fourth Amendment) As I've said before, the difference between "allowed" and an inherent human right is central to a free society.
So, rather than copy music like mad and try to use this defence in court when caught, you might want to protest against this, call your representative or whatnot. Might be a whole lot more effective.
I agree. I meant to say that I would like to see that defense used in already existing cases as a form of protesting the absurdity of this policy.
So if the Supreme Court has agreed to this and the Customs agents are making copies "for security", then the Supreme Court has ruled that making a digital copy is not stealing. When customs searches my bag, they don't get to keep anything form it unless there is something legal there. SO if they are allowed to make a copy, and that doesn't count as seizure of my property, then my digital copy of some music or a movie isn't theft either because I didn't seize any property. I hope EFF uses this in an RIAA case. The best way to take on a bad policy like this is to apply it to as many things as possible. I wonder if I can make a copy of what is on the customs office computer, if having a digital copy isn't a seziure of property.
Umm, until recently The Carlyle Group was heavily invested in by the Saudi bin Laden family, and Halliburton has built an HQ in Dubai. So no, the middle eastern elite are profiting just as much from this war as the US defense and oil elite.
That article was written when oil was a little over $60 a barrel, Today it's $87 a barrel, so I forgot to include one other group that was war profiteering: everyone in the oil business. Which largely comprised of the people in charge on both sides of this war. How can you hope for peace when the leaders of both sides are making huge profits because of the war?
Most people who are bright enough to see how much money is being wasted, aren't US Citizens so they don't mind at all.
Oh we see it and we mind, but you seem to think that we are actually in a position to do anything about it. Protests don't do anything when they are made from a First Amendment Zone. We voted our sorry excuse for an opposition party into power and they didn't stop the war. We have attempted to legally address the the deception that paved the way for this war in the first place (see my sig) but that hasn't even appeared in our evening news on a slow news day. None of our viable candidates for the next presidency are willing to pull the troops out. You seem to suffer from the misconception that Americans actually have any control or accountability from our government.
How many million a day is it? I cant figure out where the money is going.
It's going to interests owned by the like of The Carlyle Group and Halliburton
Given how unpopular the war in Iraq is here in America, it would make sense that the US military would want to keep that knowledge from anti-American Iraqis. It's got to be hard to justify your presence as soldier on foreign soil when there is obvious that even your homeland doesn't believe you should be there. If the US military is going to have any hopes of changing the Iraqi culture it would be in their interests to control what information the Iraqi people have.
Then what could possibly be the point? If people weren't willing to pay for the Concorde, why do people think they'll be willing to pay even more for this?
That depends on if they are aiming this at a super luxury market or trying to make it a more mainstream product. There is a higher disparity in wealth distribution today than there was in the 70's and 80's. So if this is solely for wealthiest 0.5% then perhaps there is a way to make it cost effective. $100,000 ticket prices might make it work. But I agree that there seems little chance of mainstream success given what happened with the Concorde.
you should probably leave that science to someone much better at it.
Yes, because the all the money and energy spent on string theory has delivered such wonderfully useful real world applications... I'm not against scientists exploring counter intuitive ideas like: the 11 or so dimensions in string theory or mystical forms of matter with completely foreign properties that only exist in the great depths of space. I am against having public or university funds and energies spent on these things, especially when there are so many branches of science that have just as much if not more potential to improve life and are far less fantastical.
ok here's a test for this theory, produce some of this "phantom matter" So me something with negative mass, I'll use it to build anti-gravity devices and he will have all the research funding he ever needs.
How long till this, in some form, is used to increase breast size? It seems growing a jaw would be more difficult than growing new/more breast tissue, and they would be "real".
Women with real breasts larger than a D-cup frequently seek breast reduction surgery, natural breast tissue isn't strong enough to support that much weight in an aesthetically appealing way. When science comes up with a way to make a 40 year old's natural breasts perky again, then plastic surgeons will have to rethink their business model.
I think this guy could supply plenty of the funds India isn't all poor, they just have a larger wealth divide then most western countries.
So can they be sued for false advertising if they have a commercial that shows more than four people watching football together? If it is illegal to "use their product" in that way, are beer commercials that show large numbers of people over at a person's house enjoying the game together promoting copyright violation?
It's quite possible to be Islamic and not follow Sharia
Now that really depends on which Muslims you ask. Unfortunately the Muslims who feel that proper Islam requires Sharia Law are also much more prone to enforcing their religious views with physical force. They may even be in the minority in many places, but they are the vocal, violent minority. So yes, "it's possible to be Jewish and not follow all 613 laws in the Torah" but it is also possible to do so in Israel without being beaten, maimed, or executed.
That is one of the things that so many people fail to understand. You cannot give a country democracy. When a critical mass of people in the country are free within their own minds then they will take steps to become free. Then we can jump in and help. If the people are not mentally/culturally ready for democracy then it won't work. They will just vote who they are told to vote for by their imam,priest,televangelist,newscaster,celebrity. We have a different level of the same problem here in the US, people vote based on their emotions and we end up making some really stupid national political decisions as well.
A judge pleading "oh but it's out of my hands, the murder must got free" is exactly the kind of words games I am talking about. Yes, the legislature is at fault as well, but to say that they are "my elected officials" implies that I had a worthy option available to me on the ballot. When there is a candidate running that will gut the bloated pile of bullshit that is our code of law, then you can say that they are "my elected official". When there is a candidate on the ballot who steps up and admits that the War on Drugs is more damaging to our society than the drugs themselves, then there could be "my elected offical". If good lawyers and thoughtful voting could solve the problems of our broken governmental system, then why are we in such a sorry state? We have per capita, four times the number of people in prison than the European average. and over three and a half times the murder rate. Our legal/government system is broken, but very profitable to the people in charge of it. How do you think it will change if not through violent reformation by the people who have been failed by that system? Do you think that people and institutions that have gained a great deal of power are going to willingly surrender their excesses? I would be all for a peaceful solution, but if I try to put economic pressure on the government, they will eventually send men with guns to haul me away or simply seize my bank account. The soap box and the ballot box have failed; the jury box isn't looking very promising (see my sig). Unfortunately all that leaves is the ammo box. Please point out a non-violent way will get results, because when I look at the direction of our country I don't see a place I would want to have children in.
However, I don't think that the answer is bloodshed; try contributing to groups like Public Citizen and the Electronic Frontier Foundation who are trying to protect our rights.
So you are suggesting that the solution for the problem of lawyers is more lawyers? Sorry, but no that is not the solution. Mainly because it only strengthens the in hold that legal speak has over common sense. Letting a murder go because someone forgot to say "simon says" is a crime in and of itself and should be treated accordingly. With malatov cocktails and hunting rifles. Seriously, if more people are going to be allowed to die because of a slimebag lawyer and judge who bows to word games then it should be that judge and that lawyer and those murders who die. I'm not encouraging day to day vigilantes, but just like when your car breaks down you have to get out and push, when they legal/government system breaks down the public has to step out side the normal social agreement and replace the broken parts. I know that sounds harsh, but there are always lives at stake it's just usually the lives of the average citizens in the courtroom. When most people go into a court room it's because there is something life changingly serious going on. Lawyers who play word games with people's lives are just as damaging to a harmonious society as thieves and murderers.
The was your friends fault. I agree that lawyers are scum but your friends should have done some more research.
Did they have to hire a lawyer to get married? Did they have to fly far away or do a lot of research? Why should they have to do those things to reverse it? The legal system is designed by lawyers for lawyers, justice and service to the people has take a back seat. Face it, when you have known criminals getting out on a technicality, it's not about justice or preventing further crime, it's about word games with the legal code. This couple suffered from the same thing, it was quite obvious to everyone what was intended, but they didn't play the word game right so now they have to pay.
These guys will be smashed into paste by hordes of the highest paid lawyers on planet Earth first thing Monday morning.
Are you talking about the patent troll or the dipshit patent officers who let this slide or both? The patent officers should be held responsible for what could be severely damaging neglect it their duties. The patent troll should have all other patents seriously reviewed, and if found to be abusing the patent system they should lose all patents and the right to make future patents. Make that apply to the individuals involved, not just the corporation. As long as the only damages coming from abusing the patent system are monetary, then abuse is just a matter of figuring the odds and trying to find loopholes in the law. Abusers should simply be removed from the system.
"Uncertainty" according to whose standard?
It's pretty easy when you look at the vote tallies for your county and see that the candidate you voted for is showing zero votes. That makes it obvious that the original count is wrong. It's difficult to spot shifting vote numbers once the numbers get higher, which is why we need UN election oversight. This is a measure we insist on in other countries but yet refuse in our own. Uncertainty is when you vote is being counted by black box machines made by a company that employs know felons in key management areas. Strangely the people put in power by this voting system, don't want the system to change, funny that. True election reform which would break us out of our dysfunctional two party system, such as approval voting or instant runoff voting will never pass through a legislature put in power by a strong two party system. Uncertainty is when 56% of the population doesn't even show up to vote, because they do not feel represented by either of the two available choices.
They're citizens, and people just as you are. You really think most of the armed forces are going to unload their stuff on their own people, because they're ordered to do so?
The exact same is true of the soldiers under Stalin and of the soldiers at Tiananmen Square. Yes, people do what at they are told to do by an authority. The unquestioning following of orders is one of the primary focuses of training a soldier. It's not a difficult thing to convince a soldier that you are the enemy, and terms like "homegrown terrorist" are already being used by our government. What could that be about other than mentally preparing large numbers of Americans to treat other Americans as the enemy and therefore less than human.
the most appropriate synonym for "well-regulated" in the 17th and 18th centuries would be "effective" in the 21st century.
But that begs the question, maintain a militia effective against what? The answer of course is that it is intended to allow for a militia effective against a government that oversteps it's bounds. However in odrer to be effective against the current government, not only would the gun control laws against fully automatic adn assault rifles have to be revoked, but people/militias would have to be legally be allowed to keep and practice with things like rocket propelled grenades. But as the much lauded rarely seen American spirit of Independence has vanished from our cultural mindset, so has the idea that we should maintain the ability to over throw our own government. In short, the more people actually believe the lie "The pen is mightier. than the sword" the more they have forgotten "Power flows from the barrel of a gun". The people who are spending 15% of every one of your paychecks on a war machine want you to go on thinking that rallies and op-ed pieces are as effective as "a well regulated militia". Do you really think that if millions of Americans were actually empowered to forcibly protect their rights, that we submit to The Patriot Act, Patriot Act II, etc?
Oooh, yeay. Another joyride
It has been pointed out that the private industry side of this is the exciting part, which does have some value, but I think the "joyride" part actually has more. Sure this is just for the very rich, right now. Airplanes used to be only for the very rich as well. Virgin Galactic will make space accessible to the public. Right now space is only something cold and functional, for the military and billion dollar businesses. This makes space fun and exciting, not for the lucky Air Force pilot turned astronaut, but for everyone who will now get to go there. That, more than and return mission to the moon or man on Mars will make people put a higher priority on Space exploration and travel. Virgin Galactic isn't about function, but about fun. Like porn on the internet it will pave the way for Space travel to grow much faster that it would under government and industry alone.
"Bong hits for Jesus" is the perfect example of just how over-controlling schools are becoming. Frederick, then a senior, was off school property when he hoisted the banner but was suspended for violating the school's policy of promoting illegal substances at a school-sanctioned event. So in the eternal bloating of government, students are now subject to the law of the school board even when they are not on school property. The fact that it was a "school sanctioned event" is irrelevant. The kid wasn't being disruptive to the schools activities he was being harmlessly disruptive to the Olympic torch passing. If you think that qualifies as a reasonable restriction you need to snap out of your sheep's mentality. Rights, like free speech, are not something that the government "allows". They are inherent to all humans, in places they are repressed by governments, in places they are repressed by cultures, but they always there. The difference is not trivial. In fact it is central to a free society.
Aqua Teen Hunger Force, wtf?
Dude, ATHF is a well know terrorist organization. It is unamerican of you to support them through your viewership. Every time you watch that show it is an insult to the hard working patriots in the Department of Homeland Security.
good job.
This is the first time I've heard of a handicapped person being discriminated against because they're too good.
I expect it won't be the last. As tech progresses, artificial replacement parts become better at a much faster rate than human biology improves. I would not be surprised if, with-in the next ten years, there will be hearing aids that connect directly to the auditory nerve and are better than human ears. Maybe 20 years until "Geordi LaForge" style replacement eyes. As the science and technology surrounding the interfacing of the nervous system and technology improves so will the potential capabilities of the people with that interface. The is little reason that and artificial limb wouldn't be stronger and more damage resistant than the flesh and blood limb it replaces.
Who made the interactive table outside the Samsung store in NYC? because that appears to be basically the same tech and has been there for years.