I suspect they could have saved themselves a lot of coding by simply randomly linking to real startup web sites. It'd look no less ridiculous.
There is no pipe either..
Now we know why there is no spoon
For the Osaka-Tokyo route, the Shinkansen made the difference between an overnight business trip or return the same day. That made it insanely popular. With the new train, you can not just make a set of meetings; you can do a full days work and still get back the same day (even more so for Nagoya of course).
Many people here get stationed at offices in other cities for months or years, and leave their families behind. They effectively do a weekly commute, and come home only on weekends. For a lot of people this would let them get home more often or even stay home and make this a daily commute. Expensive, but on the other hand the company doesn't have to pay for a second short-term apartment and the other costs of two households.
One point on this....
The navy does learn a lot about how to construct subsequent ships by sinking current ships in live fire exercises.
This is what happened to the USS America.
A minor point, the CV-66 was steam powered, not diesel.
"why we don't bury radioactive waste in sealed drums in the marina a trench"
For me, a reason would be to respect whatever life is down there in that trench.
That placing it there does not cause humans direct problems does not mean that there are no issues whatsoever.
Quite. But I can see the point that they should be allowed their say.
I think they should have to be clear about who they are and all that.
And I think you are correct, it is abused.
How to correct that, without limiting someone's ( real person, citizen ) right to speech and petition?
But campaign contributions, ax them. Or make them anonymous.
Express your opinion
Say what you think
Assemble and speak ( but neither a corporation nor a union is a political assembly, they have other purposes, and the others in those assemblages are likely not like minded )
Freedom of speech, the right to address/petition your government,very important.
But when money makes it so that others cannot address their government, that is wrong.
Campaign contributions by corporations are bribery
If they are not, then anonymous donations would suit the purpose. But you know that would fly like a led zeppelin.
>>If it is correct to limit labor union's ability to spend due to unequal protection, then how can corporations not similarly be limited?>Personally, I think all labor union and corporate campaign contributions should be eliminated. "We the people..."
"So when you join a labor union or incorporate your business, you think you're surrendering your rights to free speech? "
Absolutely not. Where did I give you that impression?
Talk all you want.
Campaign contributions, on the other hand, are not speech.
They are the mechanism for election, and should be controlled to ensure that We the People are in charge.
"What if you incorporate a landscaping business in your town, and some local politician says he's going to make it the focus of his term as mayor to prohibit all gasoline powered landscaping equipment in town. Do you really think that the would-be mayor should be allowed to say what he thinks about your business practices and equipment, but you and your fellow landscapers in town shouldn't be allowed to run an ad saying, "Don't elect Mr. Smith, because all of your local landscaping companies will end up out of business." Why do you think such political speech should be banned, but only when it's the business owners who speak it?"
The business owners are still individuals and can participate in this debate to their hearts content, as can ( should ) all citizens ( citizens == non corporate, real people with the right to vote ).
Why should business owners be able to effectively ban non-business owner from political speech by drowning them out with money?
"The first amendment is the #1 problem? This guy is complaining because he doesn't like a court ruling that diminished the ability of labor unions (like his) to be allowed to spend money on political ads when other people weren't allowed to. He's upset about a court correctly finding that unequal protection under the law, and the government directly limiting political speech, was unconstitutional."
Then I have to assume you are against the recent loosening of campaign finance regulation for corporations.
If it is correct to limit labor union's ability to spend due to unequal protection, then how can corporations not similarly be limited?
And how does the "ability to associate" argument fit here? Every time I speak about removing corporate campaign contributions, I hear "ability to associate".
A labor union spending is no less "ability to associate". And if you argue that it is the union bosses who decide how the money is spent, you are correct, but that is the same situation as in a corporation.
"I'm not apathetic about the first amendment, are you?"
Not at all. I think it is great.
Personally, I think all labor union and corporate campaign contributions should be eliminated.
"We the people..."
I appreciate your idea, but I don't think it's that good a fit for the Segway.
People that can't walk a mile most likely needs their own assistance tech - a walker, a wheelchair - on the bus or train as well. And people that don't have time to walk a mile or two won't be helped by a thing that barely moves above walking speed. A bicycle rental spot (or free city bikes) would be more helpful and less costly.
No, Linus needs to use his finger.