Dude ... whatever that overly long diatribe was about, I'm sure it has fuck-all to do with a free web browser.

Get a grip, a freebie web browser isn't the same of a can of tuna with dolphin meat in it or whatever screed you wrote a baby-bible over.

Must not have done well in physics class? Back in my day we learned how Pi was derived in geometry!

If you're a US citizen you do have to file with the IRS every year, even if you don't live in the US and don't have any income in the US.

The only way out of it is to renounce your US citizenship.

Because NASA's primary contractors couldn't design a simple light-weight Soyuz-like capsule to go on Atlas V for less than a couple of billion dollars and 4 years development.

And they couldn't design Version 2 of the Shuttle without turning it into a ridiculous beyond-the-bleeding-edge SSTO wank-fantasy (NASP/VentureStar/DeltaClipper...) Every time NASA got permission/funding to develop a Shuttle replacement, they screwed it up. Over the last 30 years, they lost so much engineering experience, they couldn't even design a capsule or mini-spaceplane to service the ISS.

Cancelling the shuttle outright was meant to force them to "focus" on a practical solution.

Instead, NASA came up with Constellation...

Solar is questionably useful. It's intermittent.

Wind is a joke. It's not only intermittent, it doesn't generate much power.

I read (or seen) somewhere, it's estimated it would take us 50 years alone to build enough wind turbines across the earth to even touch the power we're getting from coal.

Nuclear is the only way, that is where people need to wake up and open their eyes. We have the technology... just have a lot of fear (no doubt stirred up at every chance by oil and gas) too. It's the only solution that we can build fast enough and generate enough power (constantly, none of this intermittent BS) to offset our appetite for fossil fuels.

Do you remember the 80s?

Global Warming? Climate Change? or Human Induced Global Warming? Which one are we debating about now???

I remember when we were told that "AquaNet Hairspray" and CFCs were causing "Global Warming". I suppose the school lunch room cafeteria talks were not as enlightened as most--considering Michael Jackson and Madonna were drowning out most of the conversations.

Human "Induced" Global Warming has become a "religion" of sorts. There is very little tolerance towards those who are sceptical about the "science" behind it.

No one really opposes the idea of "Climate Change" in general. Climate swings, hot, cold--after all, we do have 4 seasons, (except in Canada, where there are three: "our hockey teams are /really/ bad"; "WOW, is that another igloo?"; and, " Wait, what? We are actually a city in North Dakota?" seasons).

You cannot blame the majority of the population for looking at the empirical evidence that all of us have have access to, and this evidence can validly be used to refute /very/ obtuse data sets in support of scientific claims that have /very/ political ramifications.

Rather, we should commend sceptics as they require "real scientists" to attain a much higher benchmark of evidence.

Its easy to accept Climate Change... Even possible to accept global warming. But "Human Induced" Global Warming Theories that affect politics? Whoa now. Slow down.

There is WAY too much conflict of interest behind the "theory" of "Human Induced" Global Warming. (And no, PhD researchers at universities are NOT neutral, who struggle to please their advisers, grant providers, trying to maintain immigration status, get their degree, not lose their internship, etc).

We need research reform at universities--definitely an outlet for whistle blowers in academic and professional fields.

I /really/ don't think that we can address this problem in good faith, without reform, considering all of the scandal behind this "science".

and the government has UNLIMITED taxpayer resources, power of the courts (if they even bother) to take anything. Under the "old outdated and needs to be redone" Constitution, innocent until proven guilty, the ability to face those accusing you of anything, are being unconstitutionally done away with. And how is this possible? Just watch any "man on the street" interview where people mostly below the age of 45 can't tell you who their representative, vice president, ANY member of the supreme court, how a bill becomes law, the number of amendments called the bill of rights there is and so on and so on. Our (lack of) REAL education in this country, coupled with the sports/celebrity culture that puts that as the #1 topic around the water cooler, and you will see how easy it is to distract the "HEY LOOK! SQUIRREL!!!" ldiots in this country!

Uh.... Christie Koehler explicitly said she thought Brendan would do a good job as CEO. So I'm a bit confused about why you're lumping her into your list.

OK, granted. :)

I'll just close with a really poignant statement Gandhi once made: "Can't we all just be the change we wish to see in the world?"

Ex post facto has always been held to apply in criminal cases only.

This isn't anything like what ex post facto limitations apply to.

Climate engineering works so well, even a caveman can do it. After all, how else can we explain the end of the last ice age?

The following might to tangential to this particular incident, but do keep in mind that a major part of today's case law is that the government can file a proceeding where the money itself is the defendant, i.e., no human person ("you") is recognizable in the case. Historically that was used in cases where the owner was unknown, but in the drug-war era it's used for asset forfeiture even when the owner is known. If I had to prioritize things to get upset about, it would be that ongoing nightmare in our legal system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_rem_jurisdiction

Okay, they found correlation. The question is, did they find causation?

To paraphrase rationalwiki.org, the fact that there's a strong and persistent correlation between shoe size and reading ability does not mean large feet cause good reading skills.

It is possible that if this was social security benefits paid to surviving children, then even if it was paid to the child's guardian, it could still be the child's debt. But what do I know?

AC is correct.

Fusion is for stars, not for earth. Too complex, too expensive.

4th Gen nuclear power plant designs are the way to go: IFR and LFTR

Or a recognition that if the money goes in the bank your spouse will expand your expenses to match the income. The interest on the refund isn't nearly as much as I save by not letting my wife spend it for a year. It gives us a chance to buy something nice once in a while.

A majority of Republicans voted for it as well. The real question is who added this particular provision, and are they still in office? I'm not sure how to dig up that crucial bit of info.

It could be argued that this money never belonged to you in the first place since it was an over payment.

Due process not needed.

So, he'll chuck you in the slammer for destroying evidence.

What do the Democrats have to do with cancellation of the shuttle?

The program was cancelled under Bush; NASA stopped ordering parts, production was shut down. And Bush supported the Constellation abomination, even though it went completely against his own plan's (VSE's) guiding principles, drastically delayed any shuttle replacement, was inherently unsafe, and... argh... Anyway, Obama added an extra shuttle flight to extend the program, using up the last reserves of parts, and tried to end Constellation and redirect NASA towards commercial HSF.

I don't think Obama has any interest in space flight, he probably considers it a waste, and certainly the Democrats in the Senate created the SLS-zombie out of the rotten corpse of Constellation; but the Dems had nothing to do with cancelling the shuttle.

This is why the notion that we need more "compromise" in Washington is so overrated. The Democrats say they want higher spending and higher taxes. The Republicans say they want less spending and lower taxes.

The compromise is usually higher spending and lower taxes.

So basically, they're proposing beginning amateur terraforming on the only habitable planet we have?

Not sure I think that's such a grand idea. So much that could go wrong experimenting with terraforming on the only ball we got to play with.

Don't worry, the Blues Brothers are on a mission from god and will pay the debt of the orphanage.

Maybe you missed most of the other threads here, but yes, many people are saying that this video is enough to disprove Apple's claim. That's why I pointed out non-continuous movement. And as to why you would do that, it's the relevant test under 35 USC 102.

Then prove it. To show that something is obvious at the time the video was made, having admitted that the video doesn't show continuous movement, all you need is another reference from the same era that does. That is the test for obviousness under 35 USC 103: if a combination of references teaches or suggests each and every element in the patent claim, then it's per se obvious.

Yet they got the patent.

No one has found the other references yet. Why, I don't know. Probably because they're too busy arguing that this is so mind-numbingly obvious that they don't need to fulfill the requirements of due process.

I have long thought that we should amend the Constitution to say that every bill must be read out loud in its entirety before it can be voted on, and that only members who sit quietly with no electronic equipment though the entire reading should be allowed to vote on it.

A bonus would be that every sponsor of a bill would have to approve every amendment to a bill. That way you would always have at least one person who could be held personally accountable fore the whole bill (i.e. they wouldn't be able to claim they had to vote for the bill even though it contained some provisions they didn't like since they would be able to eliminate any provision they didn't like).

How come these, err, 'dues' aren't rescinded when the person dies?

Of all the problems, that's the one you attach to? This is an ex post facto law (the debt was "clear" in 2010, and owed in 2014 due to change of law). It's seizing without due process, and it's an illegal bill of attainder. Though I'm sure it's a new class of "seizure" that doesn't need to follow any of the legal protections in the Constitution. Like being pulled over for speeding is both an arrest and not an arrest at the same time so they can pick and choose rights and powers that apply.

If it happens at all, it's using independent contractors.

These debts are mostly from SSI aid to dependent children. The money is sent to the parents, but strictly speaking the children are the beneficiaries.

Because nobody's going to pass the law that makes politicians liable for their actions.