I would expect that it's classified as some sort of "Experimental" vehicle at this point, for which the usual rules do not apply. So I doubt the FAA has much to do with it either.
No, TFS has it correct. It's classified as "Commercial Spaceflight," and the Federal Government deliberately moved jurisdiction from NASA to the FAA.
Which has then conspired to de-legitimize the celebration of its own independence. I have close to zero respect for anti-fireworks laws. Go ahead and do it, but be responsible, or be held liable. What the hell is wrong with that?
What's wrong with that is that it's a little hard to track down the individual who lit the fireworks AFTER a wildfire has devastated the region. You do understand that fire prevention is the primary reason for these laws, right? (There may be rural areas where the noise frightens livestock, and that would be a legitimate reason for prohibiting their use as well).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/maga... when it happened....there were nukes.....hmmm who knew
The way to do it that would have been legal would have been to petition parliament like the Scottish just did, you can't just decide you don't like the way your country is run so you'll make you're own....if that was a thing, I'd have my own already.
Um, remember that phrase "taxation without representation" that got thrown around back then? Parliament did not recognize the colonies' right to petition because there was no colonial representative member. The colonists then did what they could--petitioned the king directly.
I guess that didn't help either.
The flag only represented treason when the South lost. Up until then it represented freedom from the oppressive North, a North that wouldn't let them govern themselves how they saw fit.
I can't believe we're still dealing with this strawman. I also can't believe you don't see the irony in your own statement. The people of the south wanted "freedom" to deny freedom to others, and you're OK with that?
When some folks finally got enlightened enough to realize that the ownership of human beings is just plain WRONG, a majority of the citizens of the US (which is how our representative democracy works) convinced their legislators and President that "how they saw fit" should be outlawed. They way we effect change in this country is through legislation. If an Army base were to be attacked today for the reasons that Fort Sumter was shelled, we'd call it terrorism. So, yes, the flag was treasonous on the day it was created, and continues to be so because of the "ideals" it represents.
The southern states only considered this "oppressive" because an end to slavery meant lower profits for slave-owners. This is clearly outlined in their secession statements.
It is interesting to note that some of Disney's most well-known films are based on public domain works, while Disney has been one of the biggest factors in eliminating the public domain altogether.
can you open that up for us? I wasn't aware of this, and would appreciate a short schooling session
Open it up? You weren't aware that Disney didn't have to pay anyone for the rights to Cinderella, Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Alice in Wonderland, Hercules, Hamlet (The Lion King), Mulan, Pocahontas, Pinocchio, ad infinitum? .
I always use my favorite example of how they abuse copyright--Disney has now held the copyright on *their* version of Alice in Wonderland for more than twice as long as Lewis Carrol did for the original work.
I'm sure the logic is that only other baseball teams would want that data anyway, so there was no real concern about a group of Russian hackers copying a database. Why be fort knox secure when you trust and respect the other 29 teams that you share billions of dollars of revenue with? Naive, yes. Intentional, no. Deserved what they got, no. (No one deserves to be the victim of a crime)
As a resident of Houston who has avoided the sport since they gave the home run title to a cheater, I have to respond to this part of your comment. If THAT was the logic, then while they may not have "deserved" it, implementing security this poor amounts to criminal negligence. There are *plenty* of others who would want the info. You see, there's this little thing called gambling, and small advantages like this is how the pros stay ahead. Strangely enough, these same pros also tend to associate with folks who are part of organized crime.
The organization doesn't have any knowledge management systems so the only way it seems I can pass on this information is by copying all the info into a series of documents, which isn't much fun to do in Outlook. Can my fellow Slashdotters can suggest a better approach? By the way, there's quite a lot of confidential stuff in there that my successor needs to know but which cannot leave the organization's existing systems.
What would be wrong with saying Pac-Man AI?
The fact that the game's (ghosts') responses are completely deterministic. They follow distinct logical rules, and do not make "choices."