How did he violate his oath? He was supposed to uphold the US Constitution, is he not? His state's anti-gay law was unconstitutional, so he had every right to refuse to enforce it.

If his state passed a law banning Catholicism, do you think he should be bound to enforce that one too, even though it's obviously and clearly in violation of the First Amendment?

Unless, of course, you're talking about Andrew "Dice" Clay, right? Really, can you be more up-market than him?

That said, I've been around here a lot less in the past few weeks. I get more useful and current tech news through google news and if I want to know what conservatives are yelling in an echo chamber I can witness that through other places as well. The utility of this site is dwindling rapidly.

I recall someone posted the directions for how to make sudafed from crystal meth. Being as the latter is easier to buy than the former, you could start with that. For obvious reasons I'm not going to search for that method myself.

I don't recall if you get drain cleaner back out of it or not, though.

How would they restrict them to something that someone with enough money couldn't buy their way around? Being as the drug cartels have no shortage of money, it seems like a pointless move.

I'm pretty sure they own more than this crappy site, so I'd say no :)

That said, it also reminded me of DHL, which left me thinking it was a crappy web site associated with a third-rate courier service.

To the conservative majority here on slashdot, few things are scarier than the notion of something evolving. They are extremely selective about acknowledging changes to the constitution as being valid at all - notice their new war on the 17th amendment as one example - even when they are ratified by congress through the proscribed methods for amending the constitution. The idea that the constitution could itself evolve is nothing short of heresy for them.

Several reasons come to mind:

• There is a lot more diversity in end product in the automobile industry today than there has ever been in the PC industry. A Hyundai Sonata is a lot different from a Chevrolet Suburban and neither is similar to a Ford Mustang in any meaningful way beyond they all have four wheels and run on gasoline.
• The OS as a deciding factor was important to PCs because it dictated how users interacted with their PC and how software and hardware was developed for the same. There is no unified "OS" for a car, nor is there reason for one to exist.
• The closest that Apple and Google can actually get to changing how people interact with cars is through the touch screen multimedia interfaces - which are often the most problematic parts of cars. Even through those though there are not that many avenues for selling more stuff to most users, so the potential gain there is not that great.
• As cities grow, more people use public transportation on a regular basis and interact directly with cars on a less frequent basis. A new car "OS" matters almost not at all to the millions who don't have cars.

Yeah, but aren't the search engine ads also less obtrusive, like usually on the side where they're obvious that they're ads? That makes them easy to ignore (and doubly so, since they aren't graphical with flashing colors and shit like that which draws your eye to it).

I'm not saying they're perfect by any means, but compared to most advertising these days, it's a giant step up IMO.

I haven't seen any indication of them violating his second or third amendment rights.

Not at all. This is simply saying that the companies holding the analytics data for advertisement and using it to sell ads should be separate and distinct from the companies selling products, and that the companies selling the products should be providing info to them without providing any PII, tracked only by a persistent advertising identifier, and that a cookie nuke should reset that advertising identifier, destroying all prior history.

Cities will go completely bankrupt before they even think of reining in their police.

I seem to remember that plane literally leaking fuel when it was on the ground.

Probably not much, however, who wants to live someplace where they have to hear the boom of a massive lightning storm day in and day out? Thunderstorms are noisy, it's true, but for most people they're a fairly rare event.

Hahaha, that's like the opposite of that patent office guy circa 1900 who said that everything that could be invented had already been invented.