Replace "First" with "Second", and your statement is still perfectly valid.
No, it's not the same thing at all. The 2nd specifies that it applies to a well regulated militia, so it doesn't actually apply literally to gun control, the question is if control violates the intent of it. The 1st, on the other hand, has the qualification of "congress shall make no law..." So any law granting authority for NSLs violates the constitution. In same cases the argument is made that something other than congress passing a law violates the intent of the 1st, but in the case of NSLs, the FBI uses various laws passed by congress as it's rationale, therefore any portions of those laws that do grant the FBI authority for NSLs is unconstitutional whether the 1st is taken literally or on its intent. Of course, that just applies to the disclosure portion. The purpose of the NSL is to force a search and/or seizure without a warrant, which is in direct violation of the 4th amendment.
Nowhere in the text of either the 1st or 4th amendments does it specify exceptions for suspected terrorism. This sort of thing is exactly what the Bill of Rights is meant to protect us against.
WRONG!! You're reading it wrong.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The text of the amendment is a comma separated list of things that cannot be infringed. It should be read as: "These things shall not be infringed; A well regulated militia (necessary to the security of the state) and the right of the people to keep and bear arms." That comma between the "well regulated militia" portion of the sentence and the "right of the people" means AND. Also "well regulated militia" does not mean "regulated" as in govt. controlled, it means a trained militia.
Study the founders supporting documentation a little sometime and you may learn something.
You are getting yourself in a world of pain!
XP users will bitch and moan enough already if they have to use Windows 7 or 8. Giving them Linux would be much worse.
Here are some common misconceptions about end users: 1. They are stupid and only do stupid thing with there PC: Firefox and libreOffice is not the limit to a persons PC usage. They are going to do more complex things even if they don't realize it. They will want to share files over the network, they may want to attach their Camera to their PC, Video Conference, Do some graphics manipulations, even sometimes do basic system admin on their PC, such as updates or putting in a driver. You need to give them more credit then most people do. Linux for the desktop tends to have a doughnut hole in usability. You get Granny Open your program and browse the web. You got advanced user where you can script and program all you want... The hole is in the Moderate user category.
2. Their PC's will work great with Linux: Who really fully checks the Linux compatibility list when getting a PC. Especially if you initially get a windows PC. Even old PC's you may find that a network controller isn't supported, or a video driver never really worked right with that screen. Hardware makers usually make sure their stuff works on windows first then perhaps in Linux if they feel like there is a market for it.
3. Vendors/Customers/Partners will bend backwards to help you keep supported. I am sending you a DOCX with a Macro in it for you to view. Are you really going to have them redo their work so you can view that document. A vendor may give you a crappy convert. The customer will defiantly give you lip. A partner may question you.
4. We don't use Legacy Software: There is always that piece of legacy software that you have that makes porting expensive.
Sorry, NIC's are a bad example since just about every enterprise datacenter uses Linux as servers. Every one of 'em have a NIC in them and Linux had some of the first support foro 10G ethernet NICs. Any server HW vendor NOT supporting Linux would quickly go out of business.
Even alot of consumer HW now has Linux support, check any printer vendor, it's hard to find one that doesn't either have a downloadable driver or one that Linux automagically recognizes.
I have a friend who is severely computer illiterate to the point he hates using any computer. Since his last windows system died, I gave him one of my retired Dell 4600's with Ubuntu. He called me a couple of times to ask a question how to do something but for over two years now I have not received one call for support.
Sure, mineral oil, cooking oil, fluorinert distilled water, bunch of other esoteric fluids. The real thing that it comes down to the heat transfer between the component and the fluid itself. And this newer stuff is apparently leaps above flurorinert, especially besides that it won't kill you quite so quickly and won't destroy the ozone layer quite so badly. You thought that freon was bad? Fluorinert makes freon look like a glass of water in terms of reactivity.
HUH? Kill you? Flourinert is just what it means, it's inert! It's what the medical community was been playing with years ago in an attempt to treat lung infections, you can breath it, like in the move "The Abyss" where they dunk his rat in the tank (they actually did that). It IS slightly toxic and is probably one of the reasons it never made into actual medical use.
Toxicity Profile Fluorinert liquid FC-70 is non-irritating to the eyes and skin, and is practically non- toxic orally. The product also demonstrates very low acute and sub-chronic inhalation toxicity. A Material Safety Data Sheet is available upon request.
Although you are correct about it's greenhouse potential, it's vapors are extremely dense and thus relatively easy to contain.
I used to work with the stuff doing vapor phase soldering on specialized components.
On a phone's home screen I could see a use but not on a desktop where I keep my dozens of Firefox tabs open and all I gotta do is switch to it.
How do you see a live tile when the desktop is full of windows/apps anyhow? You still must minimize every app to see the desktop, it easier to just click the FF tab it's on.
If I could find something decent without W8 on it I'd get one. But as it is, I refuse to buy a W8 machine and be forced to buy W7 pro full price to replace it. Every store around here only has W8 systems on the floor.
Even on our dedicated trail (the Monon Trail) riders, runners, roller bladers they never yield to traffic where the trail crosses busy streets and there are BIG, clear stop signs for the trail users. It's just too much trouble for them to stop and jog in place, hop down from that bike or hit the roller brakes before crossing.
In the last 8 months the trail/road crossing near me I have already seen 3 trail users hit and one died because they did not even try to stop. I don't feel sorry for any of them due to their arrogance.
I'm probably in the minority, but I don't always drive to go somewhere, I go somewhere to drive. Rowing through my 6-speed manual is a heck of alot of fun.
I would pay a lot of money to be able to drive distracted, asleep, or inebriated legally. Right now none of those are legal and one isn't even possible.
Then just use a taxi or the bus, their cheaper. If you are traveling far enough to have time to get sleep/inebriated then a plane, train or bus will do the same thing.
What do you need a floodlight for?
IMHO there is way too much lighting - residential areas just plain don't need outdoor lighting at all; what's wrong with just carrying a torch?
Really? So I don't need to light up the places where criminals may hide where no-one will see them? There are no street lights at all in our neighborhood making it extremely dark on our street. There have already been several burglaries around here, it's so dark nobody saw anything.
Properly aimed and adjusted light/motion sensors won't be triggered by every little thing.
"When you enter your POP / IMAP e-mail credentials into a Blackberry 10 phone they will be sent to Blackberry without your consent or knowledge. A server with the IP 188.8.131.52 which is in the Research In Motion (RIM) netblock in Canada will instantly connect to your mailserver and log in with your credentials. If you do not have forced SSL/TLS configured on your mail server, your credentials will be sent in the clear by Blackberrys server for the connection. Blackberry thus has not only your e-mail credentials stored in its database, it makes them available to anyone sniffing inbetween – namely the NSA and GCHQ as documented by the recent Edward Snowden leaks. Canada is a member of the “Five Eyes”, the tigh-knitted cooperation between the interception agencies of USA, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, so you need to assume that they have access to RIMs databases. You should delete your e-mail accounts from any Blackberry 10 device immediately, change the e-mail password and resort to use an alternative mail program like K9Mail.
Clarification: this issue is not about PIN-messaging, BBM, push-messaging or any other Blackberry service where you expect that your credentials are sent to RIM. This happens if you only enter your own private IMAP / POP credentials into the standard Blackberry 10 email client without having any kind BER, special configuration or any explicit service relationship or contract with Blackberry. The client should only connect directly to your mail server and nowhere else. A phone hardware vendor has no right to for whatever reason harvest account credentials back to his server without explicit user consent and then on top of that connect back to the mail server with them."
Isn't having RIM's system login to your account a TOS violation by RIM or the same as hacking an email account? RIM should be sued for illegally accessing computer data without consent.
Most new HW is supported in Linux now, it's harder to find anything NOT supporting Linux these days.
While it may be true that many applications are not ported to Linux, what "cutting edge" HW are you referring to? Nearly every printer mfgr. supplies linux drivers, digitizers; yes, cameras; yes, data acquisition; yes, cpu/motherboard; yes, wireless chips; yes, soundcards; yes, video cards; yes, etc. etc. And these are in ADDITION to all old HW some of which windows support has long been gone,
What would lead MS to believe users won't gladly accept ads on their computers as well?
Maybe you need to get off Windows. I run FF on my Linux system where I usually keep it running for weeks/months at a time. It takes maybe 3 seconds to get running and no OOM and no crashes (the rare crash is usually due to a plugin, and performance issues are almost always due to Flash/Java sites). My current desktop has had FF open for 9 weeks now and is using ~250M in RAM.
The rendering speed has been more than adequate for me, most of the wait time is due to network latency or graphics intensive pages that take time to display on my system (no hardware GPU) regardless of the app displaying them.
Plus I trust the Mozilla foundation waaaaayyyy more than I would ever trust Google.
As always, YMMV
Would having an full-feature open source driver actually hurt or improve business?
In the high-end consumer market who cares about the open source driver other than the open source purist?
Hmm, "who cares about the high end consumer market"? What about the high end professional market? I have worked in several engineering departments where ALL development is done on Linux/Unix boxes and high end graphics are a must (EDA IC design tools for instance). I'm sure there are many more (closed source) applications that run on open source systems that need high end graphics performance and the engineers demanded the performance/features needed.
Every time I have tried to use the Nouveau drivers, it breaks my windowing system in some way I must tweak just to get working again (Ubuntu 12.04, CentOS, and a few others that I run).
I must be one of the rare instances where AMD drivers/cards just worked well for me.