forgot my link to Federal Digital System, where the actual laws themselves are: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
the menu is on the right, with links to the Code of Federal Regulations, list of presidential and congressional documents, court decisions, etc etc.
you're misinterpretting a very simple concept. they cant agree on a number because they dont agree on what constitutent a seperate law or crime. one group interprets a passage as describing one crime, while another thinks its multiple crimes or regulations.
that's the problem with this little piece of pop culture: its used to insinuate that non one even knows how many laws there are, as if there are hundreds or thousands just hidden away....
after all, its not like we keep them all written down in books anywhere...
oh wait, THATS EXACTLY WHAT WE DO.
its possible to sit down and count all the words, all hte sections, all the paragrahs, all the volumes, of all the law in the US. the problem is simply that the people doing the counting have different opinions as to what groups of words, sentences, sections and paragraphs comprise discrete laws and regulations. its like a giant messily written program with tons of GOTO and GOSUB statements sprinkled throughout it.
you can start your own count at the Federal Register ( https://www.federalregister.go... )
^^^this.
they did cheat a little bit. the expansaion was basically released around a month ago, and simply had a software block on when the "act v" button would become enabled. dramataically reduced the server load and the numbers of those who didnt download/install it until yesterday.
no, WDs can use any ranged weapon other than the class locked ones for the DH.
weapon type simply rarely matters. its just a stat stick. class weapons simply get a few bonuses that may or may not be worthwhile.
i dont see hwo free respecs kills replayabilty. id think not having to replay an entire 60 (now 70) levels just to get a new build would dramatically increase game life and reduce player burnout.
i played Diablo3 at release. it sucked. bad. hated it. left it, dropped, didnt touch it again.
tried Path of Exile...fun, if somewhat clunkier.
Torhlight 2...really fun. The real Diablo3 in many ways.
but the recent changes to D3 have all been dramatically good. they killed off the AH entirely. the loot is no longer mostly useless garbage. drop rates and quality are DRAMATICALLY improved. the crafting is improved as well, such that youll rarely sell anything, and instead salvage it more often.
if you didnt like the class builds before, theres not much i can see to that, other than if you, like me, havent played since initial release, at least giev a look cause a lof ot the skills have been changed and retuned. i remember initially, playing a WD, pretty much all the skills were like all the others. you basically just picked which button was an AE, a DD, a CC, or regen, and which graphic skin it used. they fixed that to a degree, and the skills now have a bit more flavor (at least for the Wd, though WD still seems to be rather unfairly forced to use Zombie Bears as a build, as its simply so much better than most everything else).
ive been playing agian for the expandion the last few days (managed to get it reduced cost with the bonuses to WOW) because i wanted to see how much exactly has changed. its dramatically improved. if you can find a friend with it, at least take a look. i've been pleasantly surprised and will probably play for at least a couple weeks, thuogh i still am less of a grind oriented player and may not go beyond that time frame.
one solution is better high speed commuter rail (or it's mere existence in the US) or other mass transit. mass transit is generally inherently more efficient. and stagnant rush hour is one of the single biggest pollution sources in a city. some amount of pollution is inescapable, but if rush can be reduced or nearly eliminated it can at least become limited to vehicles that are actually moving. commuter rail also has the advantage if increasing the feasibilty of accessing a city (for work or play) from larger distances, just like interstates and freeways initially did (before rush hour was invented). this allows access to cheaper land/real estate and lower costs of living. it helps outlying towns by providing more economic flow from the metro area. mass transit is great for everyone involved.
but it is ESPECIALLY good for the low income and poor folks stuck in the city.
problem is some (many) cities fight mass transit because it has the effect of allowing the "undesireables" to leave the inner city to locate work and housing in more affordable outlying areas. Specifically thinking of Atlanta, from experience, which has only 7 major transportation routes out of the metro during rush hour, the North and South bound legs of I75 and I85, and the E/W legs of I20, and GA400, along with a ring route I285. It DESPERATELY needs a metro line. But because Atlanta itself is only a portion of the area inside I285, and you have 8 different counties meeting there, there is no central authority to push it through.
this allows the outlying communities and counties to effectively kill any attempts at single real metro line, or other metro transportation system. Theres not even a single bus line. There's MARTA which operates only inside actual Atlanta (with a spur paralleling about 10 miles of GA400) and then each county and suburb has its only bus line. the result is you can't just board a single bus (or single company's bus) and ride it all the way into the city, you have change companies several times. This is incredibly inefficient, and its why no one relies on it who doesnt have to, and no one uses it to get from even slightly outside the perimeter (say, Smyrna) into downtown. The only people who use it are the less well off and poorer blacks in the city itself, and cheifly only to get around their surrounding area of maybe a dozen blocks. but it stays this way because the edges of the metro area DONT WANT those people (ie, black folks, especially poor ones) to be able to easily leave and settle outside the city, live outside the city while working inside it (or live in the city and access jobs on the edge of the metro complex...either way) , even though that kind of mobility would dramatically improve their lives and economic oppportunity. Those that can afford cars do move farther out, and join the rushhour, though again, rush hour imposes its own economic hurdles, in addition to the hurdle of getting a car (many of the folks stuck on the city dont have cars), but given the opportunity and infrastructure to make decisions that improve their family's situations, they do. And that scares many of the folks surrounding Atlanta.
Short version: The immobility of poor inner city populations leaves them stagnant and largely unable to change or improve their lives. A decent, efficient metro system changes that, opening up more opportunities, more mobility, more ability to choose and control ones circumstances, just by giving them access to more places to live and work. And the outlying communites fight such a concept tooth and nail. And its like that in many cities, not just Atlanta, and not just in the South.
It's one of the single biggest hurdles to improving our infrastructure and getting real, reliable mass transit, like high speed commuter rail, built.
punishment as a deterrent does work.
the problem is when people are poor enough or desperate enough that it becomes worth the risk.
you cannot simply ignore the basic risk v reward calculation that eveyrone does, all the time, and declare "punishment doesn't work".
its always been about tradeoffs. right now, the rewards still far outweigh the risks for many of the ppor and desperate around the world and in our own country. that doesnt mean it "doesnt work" is a hard and fast rule.
addendum: i also think the idea of privatizing prisons and letting for-profit companies run them is a tremendously bad idea.
for some odd reason those sort of companies like to write things like the original arizona immigration law proposal, with its mandatory 6 month sentences for anyone (who happens to be brown) that cant provide proof of citizenship....
in our country...maybe. but our prisons are also fairly permissive compared to others around the world. we allow free association of inmates in large groups. we have drug and gang kingpins stil running their collectives from within the prisons, etc. and we decided that we like the idea of giving them a chance to rehabilititate, so we allow inmate populations several concessions that a society focused strictly on punishment would never allow.
now personally, i think if someone has committed an offense worthy of jail time the battle is already half lost (education/prevention/rootcause-elimination being the ideal way to reduce crime). but that said, i also think our prison system is schizophrenic. we lock people away from society for a set time, make some half-arsed attempts to change them, and then when the magic number is up, let em loose again.
it's as if we're attempting to implment a two-pronged strategy within a single system.
i think it should be split into a two-tiered system, one focused on rehabilitation, and one focused on simple incarceration/locking away incurables away from general society. (possibly permanently. say on an island somewhere. though if one of the prisoner's looks like ray liotta, i recommend not sending him there.)
The problem with that is there's already at least 2 other brands of multimeter that actually are yellow on black similar to fluke's (likely specifically so they do look like flukes). not just kinda yellow like those in the summary. Sperry is one, sold at home depot alongside fluke's basic meters.
Also from the FAA's own page (http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=76240) there's a few concrete and relevent statements that cannot be ignored:
-The FAA is responsible for the safety of U.S. airspace from the ground up.
-Anyone who wants to fly an aircraft—manned or unmanned—in U.S. airspace needs some level of FAA approval.
-Flying model aircraft solely for hobby or recreational reasons doesn’t require FAA approval, but hobbyists must operate according to the agency's model aircraft guidance, which prohibits operations in populated areas
-You may not fly a UAS for commercial purposes by claiming that you’re operating according to the Model Aircraft guidelines (below 400 feet, 3 miles from an airport, away from populated areas.)
-The agency is still developing regulations, policies and standards that will cover a wide variety of UAS users, and expects to publish a proposed rule for small UAS – under about 55 pounds – later this year. That proposed rule will likely include provisions for commercial operations.
Who do you think created those rules?
The FAA.
The FAA is not ignoring those rules.
Previously, those rules involved "direct control of the aircraft" and it must be within visual range of the operator, and not in crowded areas.
So no autonomous vehicles, and no using a camera feed to pilot it.
But now technology is gotten to the point where its actually viable and attractive (for various reasons, such as commercially and educationally) to want to do those things with small scale aircraft. It's leading to an explosion in their use. But there is a potential hazard in allowing them to be used without regulation. And the existing rules are not sufficient to govern them.
And it's not just some club of R/C guys in a field in the middle of nowhere. It's happening in crowded areas.
So they are adapting to the present reality.
And that present reality is that technology is now allowing model aircraft to perform tasks never really viable before.
Both autonomously and iunder direct control via camera feed.
So no. Your comments dont have a leg to stand on.
The FAA is right about this, even if they are lagging behind.
But eventually the regulations will catch up to what people are capable of.
I suspect we'll eventually see rules based on different classes of drone, based around weight, payload, size, usage, etc.
Kind of like the kite example earlier.
They really dont care care too much about a foam gliders, even big ones, in a field.
But start flying somethings recklessly around people, where negligence can lead to "BAD THINGS", and they start to care.
And they should.
Yes. And the FAA has cited kites that fly too high, or are too large, or carry rather large payload. Or some combination thereof.
No, the FAA generally doesn't care about your little backyard peice of paper on a string. Just dont fly it near and airport and intentionally try to get it sucked into a jet engine.
However people have made kites a few hundred feet across, weighing a few hundred pounds, and capable flying thousands of feet in the air. The FAA starts to care about that. Particularly if it could interfer with aircraft.
Federal.
Aviation.
Admistration.
Yes, they absolutely need to be involved. It's specifically and exactly the sort of thing the FAA was created for and falls exactly within the FFA's jurisdiction. Those laws you cite? They came from the FAA.
It went to trial because HE sued the FAA.
The FAA's rules are very clear. And he clearly violated them.
And if he's a regular R/C plane user, he should be fairly familiar with those rules.
And really I think the judge erred in not siding with the FAA, if you assume he had to pick sides.
HOWEVER...I think the best solution would be the creation of distinct classes of drones in order to seperate out the small relatively harmless things (like this guy's foam glider), from large commercial autonomous drones that actually could pose a danger to bystanders.
"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."
