On which planet has the anti-tax movement won?
That would be this one.
On which planet has the anti-tax movement won?
That would be this one.
We're tied for third lowest homicide rate in the country, so why would I want to carry a firearm? Our rate of *total* homicide is 1/4 the rate of *accidental* firearms in Florida, even though our firearm ownership rate is 1/2.
Our accident rate per gun owner is half, because we require gun purchasers to take a basic firearms safety course. That's not so onerous. A 4 hour course with an NRA certified instructor, which costs around $100. It's a *little* intrusive, but so is having the guy in the next apartment negligently discharge his handgun in a cleaning accident.
Personally, I find this to be the single most infuriating aspect of the financial crisis -- in any country. Every single time I hear about public time and money being wasted on frivolous prosecutions, I am keenly reminded that these are the same police services and directors of public prosecutions who won't investigate the banks. Not who can't; who won't -- Refuse to even. it would be one this if the justice system was simply universally inept. But cases like this shows they can and do act with extreme prejudice when they have a mind to.
It's shambolic, slipshod, corrosive to the justice system and ultimately seditious. It's the clearest indication of the justice system which has been seized by political interests, and which refuses to perform its stated function to maintain the rule of law.
Regarding Corzine. The money did not "disappear". Corzine stole it out of customer accounts to covers his bills at JP Morgan. He knew exactly where it went; and the SEC and the Justice Department know exactly where it went but refuse to do anything about ti. They're too busy perusing basement dwelling geeks and beatniks to investigate those cases which actually rock the foundations of commerce and law. Stellar job there Mr Holder; Kudos.
which OS/Web-browser is so insecure that it accepts a root certificate from the network like this?
Firefox loves CAs. Firefox must have CAs. If your website uses a self signed cert, Firefox will scream unholy murder and frighten most visitors away until you register with a proper, Christian root CA and do thing the way the applied cryptography community believes they should be done.
And all the while, the entire root CA infrastructure is so shoddily implemented that MITM attacks like this are common at most companies. What a joke! HTTPS and SSH are almost meaningless in such an environment.
I think it's time for the entire Internet to admit that the current CA model is a joke of an implementation and cannot be relied upon to protect privacy, security, or trust for ordinary users at all.
It's a progressive state, so more government regulation is always better.
Well, we do not require transvaginal ultrasounds for women who want to get abortions.
The difference between a progressive state and a conservative state isn't regulation. It's *what* is regulated.
The NSA approves of this messege.
The subsidy is the "opportunity cost" of selling something at below market rates. If NASA sells a thousand gallons at $5.00 gallon when the market cost is $10.00, that's effectively a $5000 subsidy, even though the cash is flowing *into* NASA rather than out.
The situation is complicated, though, by the fact that the Google execs are allowing NASA to use their planes for research. It may well be that overall the relationship is a win-win, but this kind of complicated and cozy relationship between a government agency is probably not a good idea given that it makes telling good vendor relations from special favors impossible.
Both creative people and cranks have lots of wild ideas. The difference is that a crank reflexively defends his ideas with irrational vehemence. A creative person usually discard his ideas, because he knows there's always more where that comes from.
In retrospect, I rather regret not leaping on some bizzare and obscure science topic very early on in my career. With my early knowledge of pop-science and fantasy TV, film, and comic books, I could have made big headways in modern cosmology and theoretical physics by now.
There's a big difference between "settled" and "set in stone".
"Settled" science can be challenged, but you just can't waltz into a field and say, "I have this data which proves that decades (or even centuries) of research are entirely wrong." You have to start with narrow claims and then gradually broaden them. You attack scientific consensus by patiently tugging at loose ends until the whole fabric of consensus starts to unravel.
Science is, in fact, open to the possibility of perpetual motion or intelligent deign. It just doesn't make it as quick or easy as some people might like to make such ideas a new scientific consensus. The value of scientific consensus largely lies in that it must be hard-won.
So to answer the summary's question, of course science can be "settled", but settled science can always be overturned. A "settled" hypothesis is merely one so well-supported that the burden of proof lies with its would-be rebutters.
A Typical Mix-Maxer response. The rules _technically_ allow this, so I will ruin the game for everyone by twisting/optimizing them to the limit to win even if I have to destroy the game to do it.
Future generations will see the mass influx of STEM geeks into the finance and business arena as a catastrophic social development in early 21st century industries.
Obviously, I imagine an upskirt picture does not reveal any more than what you would see at a beach in any western country.
It's not about what is visible and what isn't. It's about technologically equipped perverts intimidating women on public streets and public transport, for their own personal kicks. It's about people doing something wrong because it offends another person. If you allow this kind of behavior to go unchecked, worse will follow.
(A) If it's visible in public, it's fair game. (This is the only way really to square this with so many other free-speech issues.)
Wait; Do you literally live in a sewer drain?
He flew a model next to a helipad and wonders why the FAA are stomping on him. They apparently overreached a bit when going into the commercial motivations for flying the model, but he was being a dick and the FAA is not entirely wrong to stomp on people who are flying like a dick.
You sir are a unapolagetic "moocher", obviously ignorent of the Galt-ian philosophies of liberty which divinely entitle -- nay, oblige -- this man to use his superior intellect and skills to pilot and above all profit by flying this cheap, personal risk-less drone in an environment which should be free of all oppressive government regulations, no matter how many leechers walk or crash into the path of his unfiled flight-plan. The world's creative and productive elites will not be held back by the like of you and your FAA -- they'll strike!
That's what the media is supposed to do.
Actually the media is supposed to speak truth to power, an to perform these investigation and exposes on corrupt and criminal bankers, politicians, civil servants, etc, etc. Needless to say, this isn't happening.
Whoever Dorian Nakamoto is, it's clear he's not a powerful person. So this isn't journalism; it's exploitation.
"Marriage is low down, but you spend the rest of your life paying for it." -- Baskins