It states that "Congress shall make no law..." but since this was a civil case, and did not involve congress, how does the first amendment apply?

Without Congress creating the court, how can there be a civil case? The court's decisions would be unenforcible, and they wouldn't have laws by which to judge cases anyway.

What if you search for a person and the results incorrectly suggests that the person is a pedophile? Does that qualify as libel,

I can't help but spot the word "suggest," as it's so critical. Forget Google: what if a natural person incorrectly suggests someone else is a pedophile? That wouldn't normally be libel, would it? (Would that be libel even in the UK, where the libel standards are so relatively loose? Serious question.)

I can tell you as a reader, there is a huge night-and-day difference between reading a claimed fact and reading a suggestion. Suggesting things is how discussions get started, where then people either back off due to lack of evidence, or follow through with actual claims/accusations.

I didn't even know W3C did geolocation (like Maxmind). Is there any chance you're talking about a page that uses the W3C geolocation API? That is, you're talking about what result some Javascript gets when it asks your web browser "where am I?"

If I'm not mistaken and that's what you're talking about, then look up how your browser gets its location.

If I'm mistaken and W3C actually has a ip-to-geo thing, oops, never mind. No idea what you're going to do about their database being wrong.

Well, tell those people to abandon their plans to sue the US for that in a US court, because even if they win, they won't get the domains they wanted. (Whereas prior to this decision, it would have worked? ;)

I would get a VPS somewhere (e.g. linode) and install OpenVPN on it. Then VPN between there and your local machine, set up your incoming and outgoing connections to route through there, and update your DNS to point to the VPS. Net effect: you're still on Comcast, but the world sees you as being in some datacenter.

I'm with you, dude. I didn't really think much about this one, until I saw that first image you link to. That is when it hit me: I have never in my life seen anything like this before, ever. I have seen things "as cool" (V'ger, Galileo, Cassini) but nevertheless, they weren't this.

That correction would not seem to be in your interest. Wouldn't a more valuable car cost more to insure?

More mileage (per unit time) == more risk. And conversely, less mileage (per unit of time) == less risk.

If you drive your car less than 12000 miles per year, then seriously, talk to your insurance agent about a discount.

If you want good bosses, step up to the plate and make the sacrifice and do the job.

I am pretty sure this is how we will (if ever) get a good government, too. The government has to be "us" not "them" yet almost none of us are willing to let it be "me."

I can't figure out if that's stunningly brilliant (gets people to learn a shitload more, and in wider scope), or a cowardly copout to avoid the stigma of demotion ("we demote everybody"). Maybe it's both.

But really, the federal government doesn't even have the constitutional authority to ban drugs to begin with. Absurd interpretations of the commerce clause or other sections of the constitution don't count.

Why are people still talking about constitutional authority? Can't you just accept whatever authority that exists, regardless of the source of its power? I'd think this would be particularly relevant whenever you're talking about things that do, or don't, count.

The Lord Humungus (Warrior of the Wasteland, The Ayatollah of Rock and Rolla) says he wants your refinery. The topic at hand is whether or not you're going to give it to him, not whose name is written on some deed title document.

At this rate, the Republicans deserve to win

No, the Democrats deserve to lose. Protesting dishonesty and corruption by voting for dishonesty and corruption, is not a protest.

Letting Republicans win, gets you nothing. If anything, that'll just tell the Democrats that they weren't dishonest enough.

If Tesla can do this, then so will Ford and GM, and then you just killed a very large job market, seeing as how many dealerships employ 50+ employees.

Wouldn't that be to everyone's advantage? Those people could be doing something. Imagine 50 people contributing to the economy rather than being dead weight. Multiply that by the number of dealerships. You just gave the American economy a shitload of "new" resources, for free.

CO2 output is assumed to be part of the user's cost, unless the pollution is subsidized by a third party. Oh wait, we do that. (I think they call subsidies "conservativism" now, though they fell under the umbrella of "liberalism" when I was a kid. I guess part of being a conservative is keeping up with the fleeting whims and ephemeral fashions of the times.)

The ratio that really matters is cost per distance. (Whether that's euros per kilometer, or dollars per mile, or silver pieces per league, I don't care.) The volume of fuel is not nearly as important as what it costs. This puts diesel, petrol, alcohol, or indirection tricks like electric (whether it be sourced by coal or nuclear or solar or whatever), etc all on the same playing field.

If instead of talking about Steam, we were talking about iTunes Store or Google Play or XBox Live, 100% of the Steam users here would immediately start laughing about how stupid "those people" are, to be using the store to determine what to buy. That is obviously the very last intell source that you'd use. THAT WOULD BE STUPID.

But somehow, if you're a Steam user, all your common sense happen to be inapplicable, whenever we happen to be talking about Steam (and you get your common sense back whenever you talk about the iTunes store or XBox Live). You and they can each look down on each other, correctly secure that you're wiser than the other, and oblivious to the fact that you're also dumber than the other.

And you both chuckle at the guy who uses Amazon's star ratings to determine which widget to buy from Amazon. How fucking moronic is that guy? Doesn't he know how to Google for reviews? He stares back at you, being dumb in his Amazon purchases, yet shaking his head at how idiotic you two behave, when you're shopping for software.

But anyway, no, obviously of course, you wouldn't ever actually use Steam, to determine what games to buy on Steam. (Steam's rating system is totally irrelevant, because they're selling the things they're trying to rate. It's impossible for anyone to do a good job of that, unless you define the job as Fuck The Users.) To determine what to buy on Steam, you use the same method as you'd use for any other store: you go read disinterested third party reviews published on disinterested third party media, just like you expect the Amazon and Apple and Microsoft and Google customers to do, and you shake your head with sadness and despair for humanity's dim future, every time you see people doing it exactly, perfectly wrong.

But NOOOO, the one store I use, happens to also be the first store in history to have done it right and be trustworthy! Because I am SPECIAL!!! My vendors never have conflicts of interest!

"Dumb all over, yes we are, dumb all over, near and far, dumb all over, black and white. People, we is not wrapped tight." -- FZ