Your right, we should make this the responsibility of a single government agency. That way we don't have all this nasty hacking going on.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
How does issuing permits fund such a project? I thought only Congress could authorize monies.
(Well at least in theory anyway; i.e. before Harry Reid and the Republicans gave the presidency unlimited spending power.)
Is this legal?
Mr. Obama retains the authority to make a final judgment on the pipeline on his own timeline
I mean, if congress passes it first, that makes it potentially law if the President agrees. But can a president sit on something until any time he chooses or veto his previous veto?
If so, I can see some strategic uses for that:
- 1. Congress declares war
- 2. President vetos declaration of war
- 3. Six months later President vetos his veto of war and simultaneously authorizes surprise attack.
Property taxes pretty much rule this out.
Where I live taxes on the land (20 acres of rural farmland) are almost 300 USD a month! That's pretty hefty rent on property you already own.
Kind of hard to just be when you can lose the farm and everything you're worked for to the county if you don't make enough $.
People can and do live simple happy lives without technology. In many parts of the United States the Amish practice non-technology religiously.
However as long as people are free to make choices (and presented with adequate information) most people will choose the faster, more accurate, and more efficient method every time. Trying to limit innovation in order to continue to prop-up work that could be accomplished without manual labor is unlikely to succeed in the long run -- as the person or group who successfully innovates and uses automation will surpass those who don't.
Personally, I think the next wave of tech in the Western world must be towards independent production: 3D-printing is just getting started -- not even close to the magic of Star-Trek replicators -- but this is how the masses could gain some measure of independence. Ability to produce anything you need (given the raw materials or, where possible, ability to improvise in lieu of certain materials). If this technology is fostered: the necessity of a "regular job" might be reduced.
Certain kinds of calculators have been banned from test taking for a long time. If the tech supplants mental requirements: its not allowed.
School is for teaching brains not for checking circuits designed by someone else.
Ask something less obvious next time!
I agree. Iridium bet everything on this strategy and lost. Their biggest reason: the unexpected proliferation and success of land-based transmission towers.
The only thing different here is this is Google: and recently Google seems to be in deep with the US government. Maybe they want to spread the US topology further without having to be bothered about political barriers.
The flavor of this sentence has a slight taste of contradiction. At least this isn't deception by omission, like that last one:
If you like your health insurance plan, you can keep it, though your health insurance plan may not keep you.
Nothing to see here folks! Move along!
The FAA is helping protect people like you: people who went to the trouble to get your license and have now been relegated by auto-pilot tech.
If technology is a threat to a bureaucracy, the bureaucracy will ban the tech whenever and where-ever it can.
Yet these morons flying drones near airports are going to ruin it for everyone.
No, the FAA already ruined it for everyone by redefining the rules against congressional legislation. They've also ruined it for business by not having any sort of a plan to allow them to be used commercially.
IMO people like you who think good behavior will let you have nice things when your government is suppose to work for you are the problem.
I'm positing the farmer owns his own airspace: and if he wants to contract someone to fly his field with 20-pound drone or a paper airplane I believe he has the right to do so without anyone's permission.
And if the drone flies off course and crashes into the neighbors house/barn/cattle: the contractor is as liable as anyone trespassing and destroying property with a vehicle.