Does the right to bear arms cover arms which are for more awesome than ever conceived of by the writers of the constitution?
I'd suggest you not have bare arms if this thing can set flesh on fire.
But what about bear arms? I would think that being all fuzzy, bear arms are in even more danger of bursting into flame...
Seriously, the framers of the Constitution of The United States of America had just finished a bloody and desperate war against their former lawful government, The British Empire. They did so with the most cutting edge technology of the time, the rifled gun bore. The range and accuracy of a rifle compared to the standard issue musket is just sick and was considered "unfair" by old line solders. Now days the average citizen has no need for weapons that match or exceed the technology of their lawful government. I know this because there are laws in place against all but the most basic of weapons, and my law makers would not lie to me, right? As far as a laser goes, my state already has a law about aiming them at a cop and I'm sure that some unfortunate occurrence will get the new lasers banned or at least regulated... so get yours now!
As opposed to the old school method, where somebody puts their arm up the Muppet ass? I'm not sure this is an improvement, but it should at least save on hand soap and paper towels...
Make scientific observations of the physics and geology of an asteroid and hopefully get a sample... that last part may have failed... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayabusa
I have to agree that the term had validity before the service existed. The resistance to change in language is pretty common to all cultures, but intolerance in the case of English is hilarious given the massive polyglot that is it's roots. Usage has always driven the evolution of English and when it stops growing it will start dieing.
A tweet is a local thing to a bird, and that concept parallels the service too. People that choose to be local to you "hear your tweets". It's not in and of itself a bad thing and it can and will be used for good in some cases. Just as with birds, a tweet can signal danger or summon aid... we really need to let it die down like MySpace did and like Facebook will. It will find it's nitch and when it does we may actually find it a useful tool in our AADD riddled lives.
All that said. I personally do not use the service. I suspect that I might feel a bit jealous because I know no one will ever report that: "TheLinus" agrees with the 'slash' posted by "FatdogHaiku"...
...unlike airplanes — don't have to contend with drag, so with each photon that hits the sail helps the spacecraft gather speed.
Sorry, but I have complex instruments telling me that not only will there be drag, but that it will increase as the sail recedes from it's current solar power supply. My instruments are my eyes, and they tell me that a lot of the photons arriving here are going the wrong way to propel anything away from earth. You can verify my work by going to an unlit location on a clear night and taking note of all the starlight striking your eyes... Those are the wrong way photons and the weaker our sun shines on the sail, the more those photons will come into play. That said, there is also dust and what not along with small and large fast moving objects any of which can work against or at cross direction to a sail.
There really is no free lunch... But sometimes you can find half price margaritas.
Continuing off on the tangent though, while having a moral objection to eating meat while eating fake meat does seem kinda silly, what's wrong with avoiding a particular food for health reasons but still wanting to experience that food's taste?
I have known people that will eat birds and fish but nothing on four legs. I didn't waste my time trying to understand it or argue... If the fake stuff was even CLOSE, I'd be there. But it's not. I have to avoid bacon because of gout. Bacon is a trigger food for me, along with chicken breast. I know, it sounds wrong but I can eat beef all day, two chicken breasts and I'm on crutches, four slices of bacon, same thing. So I really gave the fake bacon a shot, went through a whole package and cussed every slice. I have had OK turkey sausage, I suspect that's because you can make sausage out of almost any ground meat. Turkey pepperoni can be OK if you don't get it too hot. But fake bacon, mayo, cheese, etc. just don't work... if you really liked the originals.
Turkey bacon is also lean, and i have never seen a fat turk.(have seen fat canadians)
It also has the distinction of tasting lousy, along with the texture of thin leather, thus reducing calorie intake even more... Like fake mayo or tofu turkey, just say no. If you don't want to eat something because of calories or philosophical objections, don't eat it. Making up phony versions of real, tasty food is just sad...
Not only that, but who in the hell wants a veggie or salad when you go out for sushi? At those prices, I'll get my greens another time, thank you. But I like an all you can eat deal at Sushi On Tropicana, in Vegas (no, I don't live there or know the owners), 45 minute lunch, 60 minute dinner $23/$28, I can eat a lot of sushi in 45 minutes, I bet they'd love for me to have a salad when I show up... But I'll stick with 8 pieces of Albacore Nigiri (with citrus ponzu and green onion), a few assorted rolls, and then 8 pieces of Hamachi Nigiri (if butter could swim, this would be it) for a finish. No, they don't make a lot of money on me, but I don't go too often.
As much as you can the network, I guess... So, no, probably not... Geez, I hope we don't end up having to go to RadioShack to get a cell phone kit and a tiny soldering iron tip.
...The government was changing their tax regime, and if you died after a certain date, then you paid less tax. Death rates dropped significantly before the deadline:
Crikey mate, looks like Mom's gonna cark it... best empty the freezer...
It might be worthwhile to give drug companies a tax break for donating information that leads to effective cures for less profitable conditions
This is an excellent idea but I would even go so far as to suggest taking out the "leads to effective cures" requirement as it can take a long time to reap the benefits and corporations would be more likely to utilize the offer if it provided an immediate tax benefit.
While I agree that this would greatly increase the incentive, I think that companies would then donate floods of information that they knew or suspected would in the end prove unproductive... because they reap an immediate benefit and that looks good on the quarterlies... If I have a dog, I expect it to act true to it's nature (i.e. "like a dog"). You can pretty much count on corporations to behave in a corporate manner. Maybe a structured schedule of small breaks for information and later "bonus" benefits for the stuff that pays off... I would even go so far as give better initial benefits to companies that develop a track record of contributing information that payed off... as well as the aforementioned bonus.
Also, the people that will need the drug have little or no ability to pay for it. It takes A LOT of money to get a drug approved, if the market for the drug itself is not there then the work just does not get done. The technique used will be applied to other, more profitable issues, so some good comes of it in the end. It might be worthwhile to give drug companies a tax break for donating information that leads to effective cures for less profitable conditions... I'm sure there are many substances that have shown potential to help conditions that only have a few tens of thousands of sufferers or have many very poor sufferers and are thus a net loss if developed via normal channels.
...If you just make sure that several religions end up fighting over the right to send your soul to their version of hell then you could probably negotiate a pretty sweet deal...
Sorry, it's just one big Hell with various conveniently located departments... kind of like Walmart... Hey, wait a second...
Slashdot Mirror
Does the right to bear arms cover arms which are for more awesome than ever conceived of by the writers of the constitution?
I'd suggest you not have bare arms if this thing can set flesh on fire.
But what about bear arms? I would think that being all fuzzy, bear arms are in even more danger of bursting into flame...
Seriously, the framers of the Constitution of The United States of America had just finished a bloody and desperate war against their former lawful government, The British Empire. They did so with the most cutting edge technology of the time, the rifled gun bore. The range and accuracy of a rifle compared to the standard issue musket is just sick and was considered "unfair" by old line solders. Now days the average citizen has no need for weapons that match or exceed the technology of their lawful government. I know this because there are laws in place against all but the most basic of weapons, and my law makers would not lie to me, right? As far as a laser goes, my state already has a law about aiming them at a cop and I'm sure that some unfortunate occurrence will get the new lasers banned or at least regulated... so get yours now!
I'm still a bit worried about the bears though...
No, they're mounted. Somebody's mounting them.
As opposed to the old school method, where somebody puts their arm up the Muppet ass? I'm not sure this is an improvement, but it should at least save on hand soap and paper towels...
Make scientific observations of the physics and geology of an asteroid and hopefully get a sample... that last part may have failed...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayabusa
But, you posted as AC... so how do we know it's really you?
No, the poor kids will have MaxiPads...
I have to agree that the term had validity before the service existed. The resistance to change in language is pretty common to all cultures, but intolerance in the case of English is hilarious given the massive polyglot that is it's roots. Usage has always driven the evolution of English and when it stops growing it will start dieing.
A tweet is a local thing to a bird, and that concept parallels the service too. People that choose to be local to you "hear your tweets". It's not in and of itself a bad thing and it can and will be used for good in some cases. Just as with birds, a tweet can signal danger or summon aid... we really need to let it die down like MySpace did and like Facebook will. It will find it's nitch and when it does we may actually find it a useful tool in our AADD riddled lives.
All that said. I personally do not use the service. I suspect that I might feel a bit jealous because I know no one will ever report that:
"TheLinus" agrees with the 'slash' posted by "FatdogHaiku"...
...unlike airplanes — don't have to contend with drag, so with each photon that hits the sail helps the spacecraft gather speed.
Sorry, but I have complex instruments telling me that not only will there be drag, but that it will increase as the sail recedes from it's current solar power supply. My instruments are my eyes, and they tell me that a lot of the photons arriving here are going the wrong way to propel anything away from earth. You can verify my work by going to an unlit location on a clear night and taking note of all the starlight striking your eyes... Those are the wrong way photons and the weaker our sun shines on the sail, the more those photons will come into play. That said, there is also dust and what not along with small and large fast moving objects any of which can work against or at cross direction to a sail.
There really is no free lunch...
But sometimes you can find half price margaritas.
Continuing off on the tangent though, while having a moral objection to eating meat while eating fake meat does seem kinda silly, what's wrong with avoiding a particular food for health reasons but still wanting to experience that food's taste?
I have known people that will eat birds and fish but nothing on four legs.
I didn't waste my time trying to understand it or argue...
If the fake stuff was even CLOSE, I'd be there. But it's not. I have to avoid bacon because of gout. Bacon is a trigger food for me, along with chicken breast. I know, it sounds wrong but I can eat beef all day, two chicken breasts and I'm on crutches, four slices of bacon, same thing. So I really gave the fake bacon a shot, went through a whole package and cussed every slice. I have had OK turkey sausage, I suspect that's because you can make sausage out of almost any ground meat. Turkey pepperoni can be OK if you don't get it too hot. But fake bacon, mayo, cheese, etc. just don't work... if you really liked the originals.
Turkey bacon is also lean, and i have never seen a fat turk.(have seen fat canadians)
It also has the distinction of tasting lousy, along with the texture of thin leather, thus reducing calorie intake even more... Like fake mayo or tofu turkey, just say no. If you don't want to eat something because of calories or philosophical objections, don't eat it. Making up phony versions of real, tasty food is just sad...
Not only that, but who in the hell wants a veggie or salad when you go out for sushi? At those prices, I'll get my greens another time, thank you. But I like an all you can eat deal at Sushi On Tropicana, in Vegas (no, I don't live there or know the owners), 45 minute lunch, 60 minute dinner $23/$28, I can eat a lot of sushi in 45 minutes, I bet they'd love for me to have a salad when I show up... But I'll stick with 8 pieces of Albacore Nigiri (with citrus ponzu and green onion), a few assorted rolls, and then 8 pieces of Hamachi Nigiri (if butter could swim, this would be it) for a finish. No, they don't make a lot of money on me, but I don't go too often.
You know, that reads a lot better if you leave out the words "suntan lotion"...
At about 1 gram per bill, that's in the neighborhood of 10 tons (US) of cash... I'd like to live in that neighborhood...
Or worse, you sneeze and a semi-truck full of stuff shows up at your house the next day, along with some debt collection people...
They said nothing about sexually-triggered bioluminescence.
Well, if that came about the modern day Luddites will have a new war cry:
Hell No, We Don't Glow!
As much as you can the network, I guess...
So, no, probably not...
Geez, I hope we don't end up having to go to RadioShack to get a cell phone kit and a tiny soldering iron tip.
wait, you mean i have to trust the code i execute?
Only on devices you want to reliably and securely use...
it's kind of like that rule about only flossing the teeth you want to keep.
Well, I don't know about going all the way back to the womb...
I don't mind hanging out in the hallway though.
But are we going to all give up our cell phones if it turns out that they cause problems with bees?
No. We are going to end up fitting each of them with a little foil coat and hat though...
...The government was changing their tax regime, and if you died after a certain date, then you paid less tax. Death rates dropped significantly before the deadline:
Crikey mate, looks like Mom's gonna cark it... best empty the freezer...
This is an excellent idea but I would even go so far as to suggest taking out the "leads to effective cures" requirement as it can take a long time to reap the benefits and corporations would be more likely to utilize the offer if it provided an immediate tax benefit.
While I agree that this would greatly increase the incentive, I think that companies would then donate floods of information that they knew or suspected would in the end prove unproductive... because they reap an immediate benefit and that looks good on the quarterlies... If I have a dog, I expect it to act true to it's nature (i.e. "like a dog"). You can pretty much count on corporations to behave in a corporate manner. Maybe a structured schedule of small breaks for information and later "bonus" benefits for the stuff that pays off... I would even go so far as give better initial benefits to companies that develop a track record of contributing information that payed off... as well as the aforementioned bonus.
Also, the people that will need the drug have little or no ability to pay for it. It takes A LOT of money to get a drug approved, if the market for the drug itself is not there then the work just does not get done. The technique used will be applied to other, more profitable issues, so some good comes of it in the end.
It might be worthwhile to give drug companies a tax break for donating information that leads to effective cures for less profitable conditions... I'm sure there are many substances that have shown potential to help conditions that only have a few tens of thousands of sufferers or have many very poor sufferers and are thus a net loss if developed via normal channels.
...If you just make sure that several religions end up fighting over the right to send your soul to their version of hell then you could probably negotiate a pretty sweet deal...
Sorry, it's just one big Hell with various conveniently located departments... kind of like Walmart...
Hey, wait a second...
What's the big deal it's not like you need water to live...
As long as there's beer....
When things get really quiet, isn't that just before it all goes horribly wrong?
I'd tend to try powershell also. Plenty of resources here.
The repository has lots of examples.