Although a remarkable amount of factoryfarmed "meat" contains fecal matter
So does the do-it-yourself butchered meat. Except, that you don't have government standards for that group to give you the oooh they have a minimum value that is greater than zero which means they WANT it in there, scare factor.
It's as if there wasn't a high temperature process that helps us kill off the harmful microbes prior to consuming the food.
Don't we have a responsibility to protect those children from what their community wants to teach them?
I'll tell you what I told my ultra-religious grandmother. Don't set a precedent that you wouldn't want to follow when you aren't in power. Think having Christian laws is a good idea? What happens when you lose the majority and Muslims get a chance to write their own.
As much as you might believe that what you know is best for everyone, you would be wrong. Who are you to decide what is best for a community? Who are they to decide what is best for your community? The best laws are those that allow the most local form of governance possible and ensure that those communities coexist peacefully and equitably.
Progress toward what though? All I've seen from self defined progressives is a progressive trend to authoritarianism. The same is true for religious conservatives.
It is a shame that people don't see that both want what they feel is best for you. And it's a damned shame that neither want to give you a choice in the matter.
When the progression is toward authority. It isn't surprising when people treat it as a dirty word.
I HAVE shown up to companies with a ready to go multi million dollar contract and have been turned away because sometimes it is outside the scope of the company's business. Some don't want to deal with the government or Lockheed's rules. Others are simply as busy as they want to be at that moment.
Sony couldeasily have no interest in maintaining yet another build of their ps3 hw/sw.
First of all, children are NOT stripped of their rights in a school. They may have a reduced right set, but only as it pertains to 'In Loco Parentis'. As a government run institution, a school cannot legally make rules that strip away constitutionally protected rights outside of the 'in loco parentis' framework.
I'd think a better way to put it would be this:
Students have the same rights in school as out of school. The school however, receives additional, typically parental, rights.
Perhaps, but that's not the kind of story I come to Slashdot to read. I'm sure they don't cover this article on Epicurious or Disney.com either, however crucial this individual's appointed role may be.
I was waiting for this article to appear on Slashdot actually. For me, this appointment will inevitably touch on several issues which I would like to hear discussed from a tech perspective.
1. With the FTC and the FCC engaging the issues of network neutrality, are they authorized to wield the power necessary to implement such rules on the telecom industry? 2. Communities are being blurred with respect to the internet. As many laws are written based on community standards, if I were to say something 'obscene', is the item evaluated by your communities standards, my communities standards, or the internet's standards? What is the community? 3. We are seeing more and more functions of electronics hidden behind 'DRM' and the protections of the DMCA, I'm sure we will see more cases regarding that soon. 4. If the United States enters into an agreement to share ALL of the information it collects about UK citizens with the UK, and the UK shares ALL of the information it collects about US citizens with the US, were any wiretap laws broken if neither country spied on its own citizens?
I could go on for hours on the number of topics that can come up before Kagan, and when she now represents 1/9th of any vote on a subject, you can be certain that her opinions and background will matter a great deal to everyone.
In the U.S., this represents a huge deal to the political process: one-ninth of one branch of our government.
One way to look at it in terms of impact. Take the US Federal budget, divide it by three(3 branches), then divide that by 9. $3.6 trillion dollars/3 = $1.2 Trillion dollars. divide by 9, and this very gross approximation of her influence is on the order of:
$130 billion per year. Assume she sits for 28 years (78 yrs old?) and somehow the US budget doesn't increase and she will have a total lifetime impact of $3.64 Trillion. Of course, she doesn't determine the budget in a way where she has at her disposal that much money, but when you consider that is how much of the government she represents, it kind of puts the weight of this appointment into perspective.
I don't want to read this kind of stuff on Slashdot. I come here for tech news that has some bearing on the world. This story is specifically about American politics and should have no place on this site.
I know right? What possible impact could the LIFETIME appointment of a 50 year old have on the world. It's not like that appointment will have anything to do with directing the behavior of US law. And US law never has had any impact other countries.
Ok, snark off...
But understand, that a young Supreme Court Justice can have an impact on the United States and its laws an policies that go well beyond that of even the President. Obama is gone in 8 years at most, and as we have seen the first year, the fourth year, and potentially the 8th year will mean nothing. At most you will see 5 years of him effecting change and quite possibly only 2.5 yrs. Considering we see these justices approaching 90 years of age, and they don't have to campaign, this appointment will likely have 30+ years of influence on US law that will likely resonate around the world.
I'd place a US Supreme Court justice as one of the top 100 most powerful people in the world. They don't get to wield their power in the typical manner like a show of force, but they when they use it, it would take 3/4ths of the United States to overrule them.
Absolutely sickened me. A bad slip up, unexpected lane change of another vehicle, or a simple miscalculation on the light and it could have been on CNN.
I would happily support cameras on each end watching and timing plates. Ticketing anyone who speeds in a school zone during morning and afternoon student/bus/walker travel times.
It would have ended up on CNN even if there was a speed camera there.
Except they would have recieved a fine in the mail two weeks later.
I don't see how that's much different than a sign saying "Photo Enforcement Zone 1/4 mile". It's saying, "Hey, idiot, you have a 1/4mi to slow down or you're getting a ticket!"
Or did you not know that? I was actually in Phoenix (I drove there from CA) less than a month ago so I know first hand what this system looks like.
I think you'd have to be a colossal idiot (or so unaware that you deserve a ticket anyway) to get a ticket from one of these systems, and I did notice that it slowed traffic down on the whole.
They have this habit of turning a congested, but moving road, into a god damned nightmare as people slow down WAY too much and end up causing a traffic jam.
It just isn't a way in which I want to live my life. There are so many ways that people can be nosy busybodies (Blue laws, obscenity laws, etc) that they could literally make my life a living hell if they had their way.
And for the most part, they DO get their way. There are countless little nuisance laws on the books that could nail you several times just going to the grocery store. The problem (advantage?) now, is that they are infeasible to implement and make profitable. The technical capacity to enforce these laws just isn't there yet, and as a result, we lead relatively peaceful lives.
But lets say you invent a new type of 'infringement catching camera'. It can pick up everything you do wrong as you drive to work. Did you not merge with 100' of separation? Did you drift slightly off the side of the road by 2 inches? Did you signal for at least 5 seconds before changing lanes?
You must now be completely cognizant of each and every law and rule every second of your life or *Flash* violation. Each momentary transgression on in our VERY complicated traffic laws will now result in a minor $10 citation. Except that unless you are perfect, you rack up 3-4 on each leg of your trip.
It degrades quality of life, and for what? So some politician can stand up and state that the metrics for this years crop of violations are up? That we covered that extra $3 million budget shortfall (And we didn't even need to balance it this year).
It's bad enough that our police force goes the easy route and focuses on the simple violations that are most often parameter violations (Metric A exceeded Boundary B) and ignore behavior that causes actual dangerous conditions.
Why don't they do that? Because it is hard, and sticking a camera in the ground and saying 'mission accomplished' is easy.
i'm satisfied with 32 bit floating point for number crunching. do we really need 64 bit for most of our calculations. it's just engineering throw a safety factor of 4 on it and call it a day.
Good to know that all I ever had to do was simply multiply by four. Why did I ever bother with models and simulations in the first place?
And even if you count that, how old is Starcraft? Right...and they are still supporting it today.
Do you think they would support it if it wasn't profitable or convenient for them to do so? Do you think that maybe, just maybe, supporting a product which has a huge userbase might be beneficial to the company when they release the followup for that product? Supporting Starcraft is nothing more than an investement that they are making with the expectation that they will be able to capitalize on that investment in the future. There is nothing in their past performance which is any proof that they would continue to behave in such a manner if it were not financially beneficial for them to do so. People don't like to rely on the good will of a company to keep their product functioning.
It's no different than looking into the long term viability of a car company before you purchase a vehicle from them. Normally you wouldn't have to do that for non MMORPG video games. The long term viability of the company (or this particular product's business model) is independant of the functionality of the product in your hands. Now, with phone-home dynamics it has a shelf-life.
You may rely on a business' word that they will release a 'patch' or that they would never-ever-ever do such a thing (until they do). But without a big financial stick to threaten them with (and we don't have one), you can be sure that inevitably the company will decide to behave in the manner which it views to be most beneficial to itself. Sometimes that is in our best interest, but that's only circumstance.
Hell, I've got an agreement with a company that says they owe me nearly $200,000. You know what? I'm not going to see a bit of it since the legal costs and time invested just doesn't make it worthwhile for me to pursue them. They owe it to me, it's in writing, but I don't have a large enough stick to hold them to their word. (Other factors involved in that since they terminated the lease, they have relinquished all rights on the land. I don't want to get the land re-encumbered which is possible if I fight to have the lease re-instated/offtopic)
Do you really think they would care about a few disgruntled gamers 5 years down the road?
As much as I disagree with ICC being used as it is, this is one of those cases that clearly leaves the state, as it is simply impossible to claim that an ISP operates only within a state, as it is a communications system explicitly with the world.
What leaves the state though? If Bob and I are in Kansas and Steve is in Pennsylvania are all within a single state, and I hand a package to Bob, at what point did I leave the state?
It's an interesting concept, one in which I think the eventual result will be:
Federal Government to interstate network: You must only deal with businesses that follow these practices. Interstate ISP to local state ISPs: Hey, if you want your data to get out of Kansas, you must follow these rules.
Either that, or the rules will be enacted in a manner similar to how the 21 yr old drinking age got passed even though it would be unconstitutional to implement one directly.
...and when the parents aren't doing their jobs? The kids should take responsibility of themselves, or suffer the consequences (in this case consequences of being overweight junk food addicts)?
If we can't trust the parents, who can we trust? That's right, the omni-benevolent government. Because when you can't rely on your parents, you can always rely on the majority opinion.
Hint: Sometimes life sucks, if the worst thing to happen is that a few kids are overweight I'd be willing to accept that as the price of freedom and personal responsibility.
The FTC doesnt give a crap about censoring content only regulating anti-fraud and commercial transactions. The FTC could go after internet companies under anti-trust and anti-competitive practices laws.
Until congress(new legislation) or the president(executive directive) asks them to. The FTC only cares about anti-fraud and commercial transactions because that is what they were told to focus on.
Storage is cheap. The manual process of scanning each of these documents is the costly part. It is thus better to scan at the maximum resolution and quality possible so that they never have to do it again.
You are correct about the cost. Hell, I've been holding off archiving my audio CDs until I have enough disk space to store them all in a lossless format just so I won't feel the need to do it over again.
There is also another VERY important reason why they don't want to repeat this if at all possible.
You are going to be exposing these priceless artifacts in order to scan them. Even if they had unlimited time and money, they don't want to risk damaging the original items to repeat this process. The slightest jostle or bending could cause the ancient inks/paints to flake or parchment to crumble/crack. You also have the issue that scanning these items will expose them to light which will also degrade the source slightly.
I sure as hell wouldn't want to be the guy who tripped and ripped a page out of something like the Book of Kells. (I actually had an opportunity to access one of the few facsimiles of this manuscript while researching the origins of art forms. Accurate down to the holes in the pages. The facsimile was worth more than a year's tuition)
And what of those ISPs that operate wholly-and-completely within a state (like Mom&Pop Internet of Fargo)? The U.S. government's power does not extend to them. I guess that job will be left to the state.
Their bits compete with the bits of carriers who go out of state. They also have the ability to travel out of state. Therefore it will be deemed within the scope of the Commerce Clause.
Haven't you learned by now that the Federal Government has the authority to regulate anything by virtue of the fact that it chooses to regulate it? Hell, they recently decided that even though they BANNED interstate commerce of an item (Cannabis), if you even look at it funny that somehow manipulates the interstate trade of the item and thus falls under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government.
In essence what that means: If the Federal government decides to regulate something at ALL, it has the authority to regulate it anywhere.
I am actually more of a social conservative than most of these groups, and I fully support legalizing and taxing this. If you want people to be responsible, they have to have freedom. It's just that simple. A society where people don't engage in victimless crimes because the state is putting a gun to their head isn't a more moral society, it's just one where we pretend that everything is hunky dory.
I'm not in favor of taxing it for the sake of increasing government revenue.
However I agree with your second statement.
In a world without temptation or sin, none are righteous.
I didn't know about Voice Control, does it require any special apps or iPhone version (3gs?)
Also, is there a non-apple version of earbuds available with those buttons? I'd use mine, but they don't fit my ear well and let in a lot of ambient noise. I've just been using some nice earbuds (no buttons) that give a good seal.
Ok, lets have more suicides because of school bullying.
GOD SAVE THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH WITHOUT FINANCIAL HARM!
Did you stop to think about why it is so? Slander/Libel arise from tort law. It's a civil law thing which is basically derived from centuries of people claiming 'injury' from another party. So how do you prove injury and quantify it? Like it or not, attributing it to a cost and assigning it a value is necessary if you want anything to be resolved. I mean, the judge could order the other person to say "I'm sorry." but then you claim "He didn't mean it" so we just decided to settle the whole back and forth with "Pay him $100, that's the level of how sorry you need to be". Just as we don't trade bales of cotton for wagon axles, defining things in terms of financial harm/restitution just makes it a hell of a lot easier and streamlined.
Slashdot Mirror
What if they own the patent on the crowbar treatment? You'd have to pay them for every beating they receive.
I have paid for entertainment in the past. Some things are worth paying for.
What? No Crom?
Although a remarkable amount of factoryfarmed "meat" contains fecal matter
So does the do-it-yourself butchered meat. Except, that you don't have government standards for that group to give you the oooh they have a minimum value that is greater than zero which means they WANT it in there, scare factor.
It's as if there wasn't a high temperature process that helps us kill off the harmful microbes prior to consuming the food.
Don't we have a responsibility to protect those children from what their community wants to teach them?
I'll tell you what I told my ultra-religious grandmother. Don't set a precedent that you wouldn't want to follow when you aren't in power. Think having Christian laws is a good idea? What happens when you lose the majority and Muslims get a chance to write their own.
As much as you might believe that what you know is best for everyone, you would be wrong. Who are you to decide what is best for a community? Who are they to decide what is best for your community? The best laws are those that allow the most local form of governance possible and ensure that those communities coexist peacefully and equitably.
So in short, no.
Progress toward what though?
All I've seen from self defined progressives is a progressive trend to authoritarianism. The same is true for religious conservatives.
It is a shame that people don't see that both want what they feel is best for you. And it's a damned shame that neither want to give you a choice in the matter.
When the progression is toward authority. It isn't surprising when people treat it as a dirty word.
No Bid
I HAVE shown up to companies with a ready to go multi million dollar contract and have been turned away because sometimes it is outside the scope of the company's business. Some don't want to deal with the government or Lockheed's rules. Others are simply as busy as they want to be at that moment.
Sony couldeasily have no interest in maintaining yet another build of their ps3 hw/sw.
First of all, children are NOT stripped of their rights in a school. They may have a reduced right set, but only as it pertains to 'In Loco Parentis'. As a government run institution, a school cannot legally make rules that strip away constitutionally protected rights outside of the 'in loco parentis' framework.
I'd think a better way to put it would be this:
Students have the same rights in school as out of school. The school however, receives additional, typically parental, rights.
Perhaps, but that's not the kind of story I come to Slashdot to read. I'm sure they don't cover this article on Epicurious or Disney.com either, however crucial this individual's appointed role may be.
I was waiting for this article to appear on Slashdot actually. For me, this appointment will inevitably touch on several issues which I would like to hear discussed from a tech perspective.
1. With the FTC and the FCC engaging the issues of network neutrality, are they authorized to wield the power necessary to implement such rules on the telecom industry?
2. Communities are being blurred with respect to the internet. As many laws are written based on community standards, if I were to say something 'obscene', is the item evaluated by your communities standards, my communities standards, or the internet's standards? What is the community?
3. We are seeing more and more functions of electronics hidden behind 'DRM' and the protections of the DMCA, I'm sure we will see more cases regarding that soon.
4. If the United States enters into an agreement to share ALL of the information it collects about UK citizens with the UK, and the UK shares ALL of the information it collects about US citizens with the US, were any wiretap laws broken if neither country spied on its own citizens?
I could go on for hours on the number of topics that can come up before Kagan, and when she now represents 1/9th of any vote on a subject, you can be certain that her opinions and background will matter a great deal to everyone.
In the U.S., this represents a huge deal to the political process: one-ninth of one branch of our government.
One way to look at it in terms of impact. Take the US Federal budget, divide it by three(3 branches), then divide that by 9. $3.6 trillion dollars/3 = $1.2 Trillion dollars. divide by 9, and this very gross approximation of her influence is on the order of:
$130 billion per year. Assume she sits for 28 years (78 yrs old?) and somehow the US budget doesn't increase and she will have a total lifetime impact of $3.64 Trillion. Of course, she doesn't determine the budget in a way where she has at her disposal that much money, but when you consider that is how much of the government she represents, it kind of puts the weight of this appointment into perspective.
I don't want to read this kind of stuff on Slashdot. I come here for tech news that has some bearing on the world. This story is specifically about American politics and should have no place on this site.
I know right? What possible impact could the LIFETIME appointment of a 50 year old have on the world. It's not like that appointment will have anything to do with directing the behavior of US law. And US law never has had any impact other countries.
Ok, snark off...
But understand, that a young Supreme Court Justice can have an impact on the United States and its laws an policies that go well beyond that of even the President. Obama is gone in 8 years at most, and as we have seen the first year, the fourth year, and potentially the 8th year will mean nothing. At most you will see 5 years of him effecting change and quite possibly only 2.5 yrs. Considering we see these justices approaching 90 years of age, and they don't have to campaign, this appointment will likely have 30+ years of influence on US law that will likely resonate around the world.
I'd place a US Supreme Court justice as one of the top 100 most powerful people in the world. They don't get to wield their power in the typical manner like a show of force, but they when they use it, it would take 3/4ths of the United States to overrule them.
Absolutely sickened me. A bad slip up, unexpected lane change of another vehicle, or a simple miscalculation on the light and it could have been on CNN.
I would happily support cameras on each end watching and timing plates. Ticketing anyone who speeds in a school zone during morning and afternoon student/bus/walker travel times.
It would have ended up on CNN even if there was a speed camera there.
Except they would have recieved a fine in the mail two weeks later.
I don't see how that's much different than a sign saying "Photo Enforcement Zone 1/4 mile". It's saying, "Hey, idiot, you have a 1/4mi to slow down or you're getting a ticket!"
Or did you not know that? I was actually in Phoenix (I drove there from CA) less than a month ago so I know first hand what this system looks like.
I think you'd have to be a colossal idiot (or so unaware that you deserve a ticket anyway) to get a ticket from one of these systems, and I did notice that it slowed traffic down on the whole.
They have this habit of turning a congested, but moving road, into a god damned nightmare as people slow down WAY too much and end up causing a traffic jam.
A big reason for me:
It just isn't a way in which I want to live my life. There are so many ways that people can be nosy busybodies (Blue laws, obscenity laws, etc) that they could literally make my life a living hell if they had their way.
And for the most part, they DO get their way. There are countless little nuisance laws on the books that could nail you several times just going to the grocery store. The problem (advantage?) now, is that they are infeasible to implement and make profitable. The technical capacity to enforce these laws just isn't there yet, and as a result, we lead relatively peaceful lives.
But lets say you invent a new type of 'infringement catching camera'. It can pick up everything you do wrong as you drive to work. Did you not merge with 100' of separation? Did you drift slightly off the side of the road by 2 inches? Did you signal for at least 5 seconds before changing lanes?
You must now be completely cognizant of each and every law and rule every second of your life or *Flash* violation. Each momentary transgression on in our VERY complicated traffic laws will now result in a minor $10 citation. Except that unless you are perfect, you rack up 3-4 on each leg of your trip.
It degrades quality of life, and for what? So some politician can stand up and state that the metrics for this years crop of violations are up? That we covered that extra $3 million budget shortfall (And we didn't even need to balance it this year).
It's bad enough that our police force goes the easy route and focuses on the simple violations that are most often parameter violations (Metric A exceeded Boundary B) and ignore behavior that causes actual dangerous conditions.
Why don't they do that? Because it is hard, and sticking a camera in the ground and saying 'mission accomplished' is easy.
Yes, because speed cameras are worth reaching for the ammo box.....
Well, not the people. The cameras on the other hand?
Never received one, but I'm a very vocal opponent of automated policing and revenue generation through fines.
i'm satisfied with 32 bit floating point for number crunching. do we really need 64 bit for most of our calculations. it's just engineering throw a safety factor of 4 on it and call it a day.
Good to know that all I ever had to do was simply multiply by four. Why did I ever bother with models and simulations in the first place?
And even if you count that, how old is Starcraft? Right...and they are still supporting it today.
Do you think they would support it if it wasn't profitable or convenient for them to do so? Do you think that maybe, just maybe, supporting a product which has a huge userbase might be beneficial to the company when they release the followup for that product? Supporting Starcraft is nothing more than an investement that they are making with the expectation that they will be able to capitalize on that investment in the future. There is nothing in their past performance which is any proof that they would continue to behave in such a manner if it were not financially beneficial for them to do so. People don't like to rely on the good will of a company to keep their product functioning.
It's no different than looking into the long term viability of a car company before you purchase a vehicle from them. Normally you wouldn't have to do that for non MMORPG video games. The long term viability of the company (or this particular product's business model) is independant of the functionality of the product in your hands. Now, with phone-home dynamics it has a shelf-life.
You may rely on a business' word that they will release a 'patch' or that they would never-ever-ever do such a thing (until they do). But without a big financial stick to threaten them with (and we don't have one), you can be sure that inevitably the company will decide to behave in the manner which it views to be most beneficial to itself. Sometimes that is in our best interest, but that's only circumstance.
Hell, I've got an agreement with a company that says they owe me nearly $200,000. You know what? I'm not going to see a bit of it since the legal costs and time invested just doesn't make it worthwhile for me to pursue them. They owe it to me, it's in writing, but I don't have a large enough stick to hold them to their word. (Other factors involved in that since they terminated the lease, they have relinquished all rights on the land. I don't want to get the land re-encumbered which is possible if I fight to have the lease re-instated /offtopic)
Do you really think they would care about a few disgruntled gamers 5 years down the road?
As much as I disagree with ICC being used as it is, this is one of those cases that clearly leaves the state, as it is simply impossible to claim that an ISP operates only within a state, as it is a communications system explicitly with the world.
What leaves the state though? If Bob and I are in Kansas and Steve is in Pennsylvania are all within a single state, and I hand a package to Bob, at what point did I leave the state?
It's an interesting concept, one in which I think the eventual result will be:
Federal Government to interstate network: You must only deal with businesses that follow these practices.
Interstate ISP to local state ISPs: Hey, if you want your data to get out of Kansas, you must follow these rules.
Either that, or the rules will be enacted in a manner similar to how the 21 yr old drinking age got passed even though it would be unconstitutional to implement one directly.
...and when the parents aren't doing their jobs? The kids should take responsibility of themselves, or suffer the consequences (in this case consequences of being overweight junk food addicts)?
If we can't trust the parents, who can we trust? That's right, the omni-benevolent government. Because when you can't rely on your parents, you can always rely on the majority opinion.
Hint: Sometimes life sucks, if the worst thing to happen is that a few kids are overweight I'd be willing to accept that as the price of freedom and personal responsibility.
The FTC doesnt give a crap about censoring content only regulating anti-fraud and commercial transactions. The FTC could go after internet companies
under anti-trust and anti-competitive practices laws.
Until congress(new legislation) or the president(executive directive) asks them to. The FTC only cares about anti-fraud and commercial transactions because that is what they were told to focus on.
Storage is cheap. The manual process of scanning each of these documents is the costly part. It is thus better to scan at the maximum resolution and quality possible so that they never have to do it again.
You are correct about the cost. Hell, I've been holding off archiving my audio CDs until I have enough disk space to store them all in a lossless format just so I won't feel the need to do it over again.
There is also another VERY important reason why they don't want to repeat this if at all possible.
You are going to be exposing these priceless artifacts in order to scan them. Even if they had unlimited time and money, they don't want to risk damaging the original items to repeat this process. The slightest jostle or bending could cause the ancient inks/paints to flake or parchment to crumble/crack. You also have the issue that scanning these items will expose them to light which will also degrade the source slightly.
I sure as hell wouldn't want to be the guy who tripped and ripped a page out of something like the Book of Kells. (I actually had an opportunity to access one of the few facsimiles of this manuscript while researching the origins of art forms. Accurate down to the holes in the pages. The facsimile was worth more than a year's tuition)
And what of those ISPs that operate wholly-and-completely within a state (like Mom&Pop Internet of Fargo)? The U.S. government's power does not extend to them. I guess that job will be left to the state.
Their bits compete with the bits of carriers who go out of state. They also have the ability to travel out of state. Therefore it will be deemed within the scope of the Commerce Clause.
Haven't you learned by now that the Federal Government has the authority to regulate anything by virtue of the fact that it chooses to regulate it? Hell, they recently decided that even though they BANNED interstate commerce of an item (Cannabis), if you even look at it funny that somehow manipulates the interstate trade of the item and thus falls under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government.
In essence what that means: If the Federal government decides to regulate something at ALL, it has the authority to regulate it anywhere.
An abomination of a Supreme Court decision.
I am actually more of a social conservative than most of these groups, and I fully support legalizing and taxing this. If you want people to be responsible, they have to have freedom. It's just that simple. A society where people don't engage in victimless crimes because the state is putting a gun to their head isn't a more moral society, it's just one where we pretend that everything is hunky dory.
I'm not in favor of taxing it for the sake of increasing government revenue.
However I agree with your second statement.
In a world without temptation or sin, none are righteous.
This is the company that can attract top shelf employees despite having Steve Jobs as CEO.
It's momentum. Consider GWB's popularity after 9/11. Disappointment usually lags reality.
I didn't know about Voice Control, does it require any special apps or iPhone version (3gs?)
Also, is there a non-apple version of earbuds available with those buttons? I'd use mine, but they don't fit my ear well and let in a lot of ambient noise. I've just been using some nice earbuds (no buttons) that give a good seal.
Financial harm?
Ok, lets have more suicides because of school bullying.
GOD SAVE THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH WITHOUT FINANCIAL HARM!
Did you stop to think about why it is so? Slander/Libel arise from tort law. It's a civil law thing which is basically derived from centuries of people claiming 'injury' from another party. So how do you prove injury and quantify it? Like it or not, attributing it to a cost and assigning it a value is necessary if you want anything to be resolved. I mean, the judge could order the other person to say "I'm sorry." but then you claim "He didn't mean it" so we just decided to settle the whole back and forth with "Pay him $100, that's the level of how sorry you need to be". Just as we don't trade bales of cotton for wagon axles, defining things in terms of financial harm/restitution just makes it a hell of a lot easier and streamlined.