I'm pretty sure his name is Mel.

An article about a service failing and no comments about whether Netcraft confirms it or not? Slashdot, you've changed.

The Constitution authorizes Congress to establish post offices, it doesn't require them to.

Sears made that change 100 years ago, there's nothing saying Amazon won't, also.

Remember, Sears started as the first Amazon, but using catalogs instead of a website. That they forgot their beginnings is why Amazon was able to take such a huge and early lead.

Whatever you say, Voltaire.

Damn, and I really like how "Europa" sounds, too. Guess I'll have to make do with just plain old "Europe".

Are you fucking kidding me? I've been coming to /. for 15 years now, and government crackdowns on free speech online have been a core part of their coverage that entire time.

If you don't like then create an account, go into your preferences, and turn off Your Rights Online (YRO). Otherwise, shut the fuck up and go away.

Maybe so but thankfully the rest of us don't have to click it.

Are you high? David Duke was never a candidate for President. He was a candidate to become a candidate, but didn't make it out of the primaries. Unless you consider Lyndon Larouche to have been a candidate for President on the Democratic Party ticket.

You're absolutely correct. But you're also arguing against a strawman. The point of the linked video isn't "don't talk to the cops" (though that is the shortest way to sum it up). The more accurate description is "don't talk to the cops without a lawyer present". Something tells me you would agree with that addendum.

Just the fact that you would ask that question in the first place tells me you are wholly unqualified to take part in this discussion. Either individuals have rights that society must respect or they don't; you obviously think they do not, so why should anyone even enter into a dialogue with you about the appropriate use of those rights?

Oh noes! Not everyone in Congress agrees on something and is using procedural tactics to stall the passage of legislation they don't like! Whatever shall we do???

Relax, creampuff. This kind of thing happens all the time. It's the way our system is designed. A handful of Congressmen are supposed to be able to bring things to a screeching halt to prevent tyranny of the majority. It's one of our more important checks-and-balances. Just because you can't see that for some reason doesn't make this a bedrock principle for our republic.

Um, no, that is exactly how it works. You really ought to read up on the subject sometime, I found it quite fascinating when I first studied it in 8th-grade civics class roughly 30 years ago. That's probably where you should start. Just being helpful!

None of that is true, no matter how much you desire it to be. Simply put, laws do not in any way create future obligations. The one exception to this are specific entitlement programs (Social Security, Medicare, and salaries for Federal judges). Those funds are required to be allocated and spent; no others are.

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

Um, neither of the major parties has ever had a candidate for President who was a high-ranking member of the KKK. The closest you can come is that Harry S Truman (D) was a member for about two years in the early 20s.

Ah man, now I want to see Boehner give an address on the steps of the Capitol holding a sawed-off shotgun and talking about boomsticks!