The main reason why there is no exemption for corporations is that you can't weasel out of this law by creating a "Green NPO" to sniff out their rotting waste cans.
A typical solution to this 'problem' would be to require a license, predicated on a series of vague requirements, with broad discretionary authority for rejection. That way it could be ensured that only proper cronies gain access.
Yep. I'll also give a nod to the Apricorn devices, which we use quite a bit. They are OS-independent (we're Linux-only at home) and require no drivers beyond basic USB, with all of the AES encryption and authorization being internal to the device[*]. They have SSD and spinning disk and USB stick devices, with fingerprint or passcode authorization.
Ack! The 'passcode' on the ones on the website is a mere numeric pin. This essentially guarantees that if someone steals the unit and removes the drive/memory chip(s) etc, brute forcing of the pin will be trivial. I might give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they know this is just a minor obstacle to stop non-technical thieves, except their pages are plastered with the phrase "military grade." They even have pictures of people in camo uniforms using it.
The false sense of security from such a device is extremely dangerous!
Article 11 (interstate commerce) and Amendment 1 (free speech, free association) rulez the Illinois foolz
It is the 14th amendment which applies the Bill of Rights to the states, not the commerce clause.
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
A state violating the right of its citizens to free speech is either denying them due process of law (if you believe Supreme Court precedent), or denying them the privileges and immunities of the United States (if you read the literature and understanding of 1868).
"It's claimed that users are faster at responding to familiar logos..."
I have no TV (but a 55" monitor to watch torrented stuff without ads), use adblockers everywhere, refuse ads in my mailbox, I wouldn't recognize a logo that I don't know from childhood and most of those have changed.
Do you also never go outside? Visit a store? Or purchase any products?
I also block as many ads as I can, but I am still exposed to plenty of logos and such merely by going outside in any relatively urban area. Even interacting with any people you will see logos, since people wear all sorts of them on their clothing. There's also a logo on almost any product you can buy, even if you never go outside and never see any other people.
If you don't know any logos, you must have been living under a rock. Say, did you know that 15 minutes could...
The other real issue would be with lubricants. That, or a piece with looser tolerances such as the AK-47. Either way, one would not want the lubricants to freeze nor the parts to self-weld.
Lubrication is not that big of a concern. The vast majority of modern semi-automatic combat-grade firearms can be safely run with no lubrication at all. The only effect it will have is to increase wear, which could start to be an issue after several thousand rounds fired at least. Certain designs, such as the Glock handgun, have been tested with upwards of 100,000 rounds fired with no lubrication and minimal detrimental effects.
Why not invest into research on more resilient buildings in the first place? It is not only meteors, but also hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes. Say, include into the glass sort of nylon net by regulations and forget about millions of broken glass injuries every year.
That would cost way more than $5 million, or even $5 billion. It would just be harder to see the cost because it would be forced on to people building a new home or whatever (as if that industry needs more costs right now).
The targets would be closer to aphelion than perihelion, since it would be easier and take less energy to deflect them when they were far from the Sun than when they were closer. So their relative motion is very slow and very easy to track from any Earth orbit whose plane was roughly perpendicular to a line from the Earth to the asteroid.
Ah, that makes sense. I guess then, you just don't spin up the system until you've already oriented the craft properly for the asteroid you want to shoot at.
Put the laser satellite in an appropriate orbit, and the occasional course correction could be folded into the routine maintenance of the flywheel(s). Those would need to be spun down every once in a while for inspection anyway.
With a station that exists to shoot at asteroids, wouldn't you expect to have to constantly change where the laser is pointing though? At some point, that portion of the craft is going to cross the rotation plane, unless you have TWO lasers (one on each side) and even then what happens if the target happens to be in the 'dead zone' for a significant portion of time?
BTW, A quick search got me this page, so at least NASA thinks that lower energy flywheels are a great idea: http://spaceresearch.nasa.gov/general_info/flywheel.html
If you have a procedure with 10 parameters, you probably missed some.
