Montana doesn't run deficits like other states for many reasons including a requirement in their constitution to have a balanced budget so Montana doesn't spend more than it takes in. States like California needs to have such provisions if they ever hope to remain solvent.
Speaking of people who don't what they're talking about, California has EXACTLY that provision in its state constitution. It's worth about as much as the Assembly Speaker's toilet paper.
Of course it is. You know I love it when you talk dirty to me.
More seriously, Washington is the one who killed any idea of prestigious titles and ceremony around the office of the president. This has nothing to do with free vs. acceptable speech. It's about rejecting self-aggrandizing, pompous jackasses in public life.
Sure. Who else are they going to hire as designated fall guys for when excrement encounters rotary cooling devices? Granted, they wouldn't want all their employees to be this dumb, but having a subset of their employees like this seems obviously beneficial. The guys are technically competent, and logistically incompetent. IE, they'd make perfect fall guys--capable of performing their technical jobs, but not capable of outplanning their bosses when they've been setup to fail.
Our porn doesn't have to have any "values", it just must not be obscene, exploitative or contrary to society's values in terms of sexuality
I'm assuming English is not your first language. There is a huge difference between having "value" (what your parent referred to) and having "values."
Example: Money has VALUE, not values. Porn can have literary/artistic value (and thus, not be considered legally obscene in the US) without having any values (though nihilist porn does seem rather niche).
it just must not be obscene, exploitative or contrary to society's values in terms of sexuality
The advantage is that you don't have to redefine your porn laws every time your society changes its values
I'm pretty sure you'd have to given your own statement that "it must not be contrary to society's values in terms of sexuality."
You have more faith than I do in there willingness to actually follow the constitution/common sense when it comes to writing/interpreting law. It would not surprise me at all if they'd just said 'fuck it' and acted as if the extension was valid anyway (nor would it have surprised me for the SC to agree with them).
Not necessarily. The provisions would have expired before then, raising the issue of the legality of an extension that goes into effect after a provision has lapsed. The bill cannot be effective before it is signed (no post facto laws), and depending on the language of the bill it could (arguably) have been rendered null and void.
Because you can't extend a law which has expired. The provisions would have expired at midnight this morning, before the bill could have become law by default. This would have (arguably) rendered the extension null and void.
The whole history of computer development in general has been weapons development (well, to the extent that we date computer development as starting in the code-breaking/nuclear bomb efforts of WWII, rather than with Babbage--although Ada Lovelace's program to compute Bernouli numbers certainly would have had weapons engineering applications).
I'm not a math whiz, but to me, this says: "You already know the answer to the problem"...
Only because you've never taken a physics class past the 100 level.
Lots of applied problems involve you already knowing the Hamiltonian and needing to find the ground-state solution. The process would be awkward for solving arbitrary problems, but for physical simulations it's pretty streamlined (much more so than writing a DE solver in C to solve the same problem).
I really should have specified "all encryption based on multiplying two large primes," since that's the vast majority of commercially-significant encryption
No it isn't. It's public/private key encryption. Symmetric key ciphers (which are far more significant) rely on a variety of algorithms. The main use of public/private key is for exchanging symmetric keys.
In short, RSA (and similar) would be useless, but AES (and similar) would remain secure. The real problem would become one of securely exchanging symmetric keys.
Slashdot Mirror
Protip: You don't get to say FTFY when you make your parent's post less correct. Your own ignorance is not an excuse.
Three-strike laws apply to FELONY CONVICTIONS.
Montana doesn't run deficits like other states for many reasons including a requirement in their constitution to have a balanced budget so Montana doesn't spend more than it takes in. States like California needs to have such provisions if they ever hope to remain solvent.
Speaking of people who don't what they're talking about, California has EXACTLY that provision in its state constitution. It's worth about as much as the Assembly Speaker's toilet paper.
Also, Montana operates with a balanced budget
According to the state constitution, so does California. By law the budget must be balanced every year. We've seen what that's worth.
Or is that speech also acceptable?
Of course it is. You know I love it when you talk dirty to me.
More seriously, Washington is the one who killed any idea of prestigious titles and ceremony around the office of the president. This has nothing to do with free vs. acceptable speech. It's about rejecting self-aggrandizing, pompous jackasses in public life.
Sure. Who else are they going to hire as designated fall guys for when excrement encounters rotary cooling devices? Granted, they wouldn't want all their employees to be this dumb, but having a subset of their employees like this seems obviously beneficial. The guys are technically competent, and logistically incompetent. IE, they'd make perfect fall guys--capable of performing their technical jobs, but not capable of outplanning their bosses when they've been setup to fail.
So...they reinvented hibernate?
Something between zero and one.
If all humans lived like your rather narrow social circle then maybe that would be relevant.
I highly doubt that's what he meant. Yes, you have a pedantic point, but that's a bizarre way to refer to smuggling.
Drug smuggling != Drug consumption.
Our porn doesn't have to have any "values", it just must not be obscene, exploitative or contrary to society's values in terms of sexuality
I'm assuming English is not your first language. There is a huge difference between having "value" (what your parent referred to) and having "values."
Example: Money has VALUE, not values. Porn can have literary/artistic value (and thus, not be considered legally obscene in the US) without having any values (though nihilist porn does seem rather niche).
it just must not be obscene, exploitative or contrary to society's values in terms of sexuality
The advantage is that you don't have to redefine your porn laws every time your society changes its values
I'm pretty sure you'd have to given your own statement that "it must not be contrary to society's values in terms of sexuality."
You have more faith than I do in there willingness to actually follow the constitution/common sense when it comes to writing/interpreting law. It would not surprise me at all if they'd just said 'fuck it' and acted as if the extension was valid anyway (nor would it have surprised me for the SC to agree with them).
George Washington is rolling in his grave over how much of a pretentious jackass you, and the others you're parroting, are.
George Washington is rolling in his grave over how much of a jackass you are.
The 'whiny republican' (the one questioning the constitutionality of the autopen) in question voted against the bill.
The Republican who raised the question voted against it. The other Republicans can go defile themselves thoroughly for all I care.
Not necessarily. The provisions would have expired before then, raising the issue of the legality of an extension that goes into effect after a provision has lapsed. The bill cannot be effective before it is signed (no post facto laws), and depending on the language of the bill it could (arguably) have been rendered null and void.
Repeat after me: Don't feed the trolls.
Because you can't extend a law which has expired. The provisions would have expired at midnight this morning, before the bill could have become law by default. This would have (arguably) rendered the extension null and void.
The whole history of computer development in general has been weapons development (well, to the extent that we date computer development as starting in the code-breaking/nuclear bomb efforts of WWII, rather than with Babbage--although Ada Lovelace's program to compute Bernouli numbers certainly would have had weapons engineering applications).
t a jump from 4 or so qubits to 128 is a quantum leap (pardon the pun)
Great, first people forget what irony is and now puns? Using a word to mean what it means is NOT a pun.
Tell that to Texas wrt evolution.
I'm not a math whiz, but to me, this says: "You already know the answer to the problem"...
Only because you've never taken a physics class past the 100 level.
Lots of applied problems involve you already knowing the Hamiltonian and needing to find the ground-state solution. The process would be awkward for solving arbitrary problems, but for physical simulations it's pretty streamlined (much more so than writing a DE solver in C to solve the same problem).
I really should have specified "all encryption based on multiplying two large primes," since that's the vast majority of commercially-significant encryption
No it isn't. It's public/private key encryption. Symmetric key ciphers (which are far more significant) rely on a variety of algorithms. The main use of public/private key is for exchanging symmetric keys.
In short, RSA (and similar) would be useless, but AES (and similar) would remain secure. The real problem would become one of securely exchanging symmetric keys.
No, the Chupacabra (literally, Goat Sucker) sucks their blood.