There isn't in the US anymore either.

The ExoLance folks don't seem to claim that the idea of going below the surface is novel, only the "news" article does that. It is apparent, however, that their ideas for the design are different from DS2:
http://exploremars.org/exolanc...

Additionally, their video mentions DS2, they themselves don't say that the idea of subsurface is novel, but that their implementation is.

Thanks for that. It would be doubly helpful if we knew which congressmen were supporting this, I'm sure that it's more than just R's that are getting big campaign contributions. The article only says "some House members." I'd like to know if mine is supporting it. A quick Google search finds another article that says it's being introduced by Marsha Blackburn (R-TN). There's another one, HR 4752 being introduced by Bob Latta (R-OH) that would prevent the FCC from regulating ISPs under Title II (common carrier).

OTOH, there is a group of senators who are pushing the FCC to reclassify ISPs so they can be regulated: Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Ed Markey (D-MA), Al Franken (D-MN) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and Ron Wyden (D-OR). Once again Wyden falls on the side of sanity.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/...

Looks like there are several of those. But then there's the one about a radio host saying he's a disinformation agent of the Kremlin. Or the tea bagger that had a paragraph added with wording that sounds like it's from a campaign pamphlet (rather than facts about what his platforms are).

The possibility of it collapsing is probably more of a concern than "chemicals." (FYI water is a chemical, and concrete generally contains water, so I guess they're screwed).

The deal will indeed be scrutinized by federal officials, to ensure that campaign contributions are large enough.

The big difference being that, at least when Jobs was around, Jobs was almost always right about what a vast majority of the users actually wanted vs what they said they wanted. Yes, I know you want to say how much it sucked, but that's why I said a vast majority of users, certainly not all users. MS, OTOH, has generally gone for what users say they want rather than what they really want (anybody who has developed software for non-techy customers knows what I mean). They tried it Apple's way for Windows 8, but apparently they didn't have anybody pragmatic enough to understand real-life users.

In other words, users said they wanted A, but Jobs knew they'd like B better. He made B, and 90% of them loved it. MS users said that wanted C, MS thought they'd like D better, they made D, and 90% of them hated it. The right answer for MS is probably not C or D, so they need to find the value of E.

They already are:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...

Note the bit about probable cause and due process (which means getting a proper warrant supported by an affidavit). I was looking for the part that said "except where such person is suspected of terrorism," but just couldn't find it. And even if it was there, 19,000 terrorists, holy shit we're all DOOMED!!!!

No, it's not. If we were talking about general chemistry, then it's like getting medical advice about the brain from a proctologist vs. somebody who took biology 101 in college. The proctologist still went to medical school and completed a residency which included a neurology rotation. However, in this case, these astronomers specialize in determining the composition of ginormous things, so it's pretty safe to assume that they're a bit more informed in that area than a typical physics major, and especially more than some anonymous coward that likely only took high school chemistry and physics (and maybe read a couple of Wikipedia pages) or at best a few classes of chemistry and/or physics in college.

Yes, I know, I took the bait and I'm feeding the troll.

FTA:

But I'm sure you know more about it than these folks with PhDs in astronomy.

Wow, just wow. I've seen plenty of comments on /. modded insightful that were in clear conflict with the article, but this one takes the cake! I mean, at least read the last word of the damn headline. Then you could even try reading the summary. I know your reading comprehension skills are lacking, but you could even try reading the article! Also note that only about 5% of Germany's total annual power generation was from solar. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for solar, the problem is that most of the nuclear wasn't replaced by solar, it was replaced by coal, as numerous other commenters have pointed out.

There is. Specifically, the 4th one. It's the executive branch that's tasked with enforcement, but since they're the ones violating it congress really only has 2 ways to enforce it: Cut funding or impeach the president*.

*In the last 150 years, presidential impeachment only comes from getting a blowjob, not from committing crimes or blatant constitutional violations. In order for the president to be impeached, James Clapper would have to say he gave a blowjob to the president. Since that's unlikely to happen, funding is the only other avenue.

Emphasis mine. That's really the key, isn't it...proper warrant? Having a proper warrant also means they have to show probable cause. This law is about defunding warrantless wiretapping. But, like was pointed out, it doesn't name the FBI. Did you know that the FBI is officially no longer a law enforcement agency, but is instead now an anti-terror agency? This pretty much means that the FBI can use it as an excuse to be the ones doing domestic warrantless wiretapping. However, even though this law may just shuffle things around (even if it miraculously passes the senate), I see it as a Very Good Thing because it's a step in the right direction: Pushing back against blatant constitutional violations.

Any large company with knowledge of how to do business in America would have known to invest a little in lobbying and campaign contributions.

Consider yourself lucky. A lot of people in a lot of areas don't get anywhere near that, especially at peak times. Where I used to live, I only had cable available and during peak times I was lucky to be able to stream Netflix. Speeds were all over the place, but usually between 2Mbps and 10Mbps (when I was lucky) and only a few times above that (I was paying for 50Mbps). I actually called them once hoping that there was something wrong with the connection, their techs came out and did some tests and confirmed everything was "normal." I moved across town, I now have DSL available. I only have a 15Mbps connection, but I actually get 15Mbps consistently, so I consider myself lucky!