Jury nullification has a tarnished history here, as it was often used in the South to acquit white men of lynching crimes. While it may be possible for a juror to use it, even mentioning it may be considered grounds for dismissal, or so I've heard. (IANAL)
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
When the FCC proposed net neutrality regulations earlier, which seemed to actually be net neutrality rules, they were sued and the courts said that they didn't have the power to implement these regulations. The regulations going forward, are these the "fast lane" type regulations? If so, the same companies will clearly not sue, but don't they still lack the power to implement these regulations?
Didn't the FCC vote on net neutrality some time back and get slapped down by the courts saying they didn't have the authority to impose this?
I know what they are doing now is the opposite of net neutrality, but wouldn't the court say the same thing? (Somehow I doubt it actually)
Historically, some have speculated that with automation comes more and more leisure time, people not having to work because all of their needs have been fulfilled. What ends up happening in reality however (as we see now) is that productivity gains do end up with fewer people working but instead of more people working fewer hours, there are fewer people working more hours. What happens when there are not enough jobs to go around at all?
People won't have enough money to pay for goods. Will labor be parcelled out so more people work less? Will there be a perceived "non-need" for so many unemployed people? What happens then? I can't imagine it will be a pretty sight.
Great, so someone laments the fact that some people may end up more educated than others. Wouldn't it be better if we taught everyone to their potential instead of holding back the more gifted students so everyone is equal? Lowest common denominator is "lowest" for a reason.
Mergers like Comcast/NBC should be illegal. Once content providers are also content distributers, they can pull shenanigans like these.
I remember when XP came out everyone was complaining about its online activation requirement. They said they would stay with Windows 2000, which didn't have that requirement. Nowadays, barring Windows 7, it's everyone's favorite OS. Funny how things change.
What happens if your teacher is your parent?
Always taking jobs that American priests won't do.
In an audio format. Helps quite a bit with the commute.
Investing in any company has risk. Cities should obviously weigh the pros and cons of where to invest their moneys and such but to single out an entire industry because one company failed smacks of fear-mongering. You wouldn't have seen such alarmist claptrap if a city had invested in General Motors as "it is a bad idea for the government to invest in an American Car Company".
Why should students in the NCAA be any more monitored than regular students? (As in, why at all?). As is, the NCAA athletes often bring in major revenue to schools (for football programs at least) and are not allowed to benefit from it at all, does the NCAA consider them their slaves?
Direct democracy has it's drawbacks as people here have already stated (California). But what if we went back to the original representation ratio of people in congress as prescribed in the Constitution to "The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand", that would require something like 10,000 representatives. That would be enough people to keep most individuals out of the limelight, so maybe they would actually try to do work rather than pander to their constituents.
The government sets up the system by which both sides can lodge complaints and seek grievances. The other side has to initiate and pay the legal costs.
It essentially is enforced by them, the government just provides the trappings of enforcement via civil court. It certainly doesn't pay for their lawyers in a breach of contract case. (Copyright infringement is a different story however)