The last time this came up in a big way, no one here could point to anything suggesting that flight is a necessary part of modern life, to the point that it is a constitutional right.
In fact, most people pointed to cases where travel was NOT a constitutional right.
So what will change is everyone here will now have a case to point to suggesting that the no-fly list is actually unconstitutional. Actually unconstitutional as opposed to obviously unconstitutional.
So the difference on slashdot is that people will have a case to point to, but still won't.
What the fuck?
Have you ever read the constitution?
First of all you have it all backwards my retarded son.
The constitution allows the federal government to be granted certain rights by the people to do some very specific things. The federal government is PROHIBITED from doing anything not specifically listed.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Please for the love of the spaghetti monster, where in the constitution is the federal government given the power to restrict people's travel liberties without due process? Oh that's right, it ain't there so they don't have it.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Oh and the constitution does not have to list every right that belongs to the people. They belong to the people, listed on a piece of paper or not and are not granted by the government. The government is granted it's rights by the people, not the other way around.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
So to the parent post and those who modded it up: SuuuUUUuuuck IiiiiiiiT.
Piketty's work has already been found to be lacking in basic economics 101 level stuff.
Who cares about his spreadsheets.
People think this is funny because it's disgusting, no it's funny because it's like mitt romney saying he'll bet $10k in cash on a whim.
And that's being generous as hell, because I remember a 1995 big mac and it puts today's cheap piece of crap to shame.
Also don't forget to look at the monetary base: http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/04.11/images/stl-monetary-base.jpg
Ok you don't like gold, let's try something simlar to your items.
In other words the dollar has lost 50% of it's purchasing power.
I find it hard to believe considering oil and precious metals have risen so much:
Gold for example has moved from $400/oz in 2004 to $1300/oz in 2014
I'd question your government sourced numbers given that they have the same bias to provide you with lower inflation in these data as in the original data in question.
Anytime you talk about inflation, you have to be cognoscente of the fact that every government on the planet lies about it.
Their deficit spending, fiat currency, crony capitalism for the elite depends on it.
Look at Venezuela for example
Or the US of A.
I'd be willing to bet that if you price cable services in terms of real assets like oil, gold, silver, food, energy or even a subway ticket in NYC it would be a different picture, averaged out over the long term.
If you're taking the government's figures on inflation I've got prime ocean front real estate to sell you in beautiful New Mexico.
How do you tell if the government is lying?
Their lips are moving (or they've typed something out).
Anything that goes in or around your dick is not something you want to cheap out on.
I've said it from the start and I'll repeat it now:
The FCC's interest in "net neutrality"(1) was never about what you wanted, it was *always* about gaining control of the internet. When you have the power of regulation over something, you have all the power in the world at the barrel of a gun.
By trying to support their efforts, every single one of you was dooming the internet.
The USG frequently tries to fear monger online, always accusing others of militarizing the internet, when in fact they are the ones doing it. They started monitoring your phone calls in the early nineties, but of course it must have been because of 911. Go back to sleep you retarded fucks.
It's my fucking tragedy to live on a planet, in this meat suit that is all about tribes and sharing experiences with other meat suits, with a bunch of asshole Elois like you all. Worst of it, probably if you are capable of comprehending what I've just said you are the best of the best here. I live in an impressionist's landscape utopia, surrounded and crowded by the people of walmart.
Maybe some day I'll live in a community where people care about Freedom, Liberty, truth and exploring the universe (with science). We could have been traveling the stars, meeting others and re-inventing ourselves by now. Instead we squander and hold ourselves back with our archaic infighting to protect the power and privileged few.
1. Net neutrality has never been a problem. The internet is about freedom, this includes the freedom to make contracts with other parties that benefits both sides and the freedom to not make contracts that don't benefit you. The only problem is that it's not easy to dump comcast when it's your only option in some shit town. Fix that instead. Get the USG out of the internet regulation business. You're all victims of problem, reaction, solution.
The USG needs to be cut to about 1/1000th of it's current size. I believe something happen soon because the monetary system is unsustainable.
There is no requirement for DRM on Steam. It's a distribution platform first and formaost, and there are DRM-free games on Steam. Steam also has DRM that publishers can use (and which really isn't that bad or intrusive). Steam also distributes games with all the worst DRM: horrible, horrible stuff.
Contrast this with Good Old Games, owned by the very same CD Projekt Red. There you get a promise of "no DRM of any kind ever". They distribute many games which originally had DRM in some cracked (but licensed) form, so stuff like "look up this word in the manual" is bypassed. They're just as good as Steam at patch management.
Steam is tolerable. It's good points outweigh its problems. But GOG is great. It's made of win and awesome. It's like the best pirate BBS from back in the day, where every game worked better thanks to the cracks, except it's all legal and licensed, and reasonably priced. Naturally, they're having a hard time attracting publishers, but the financial success of the Witcher titles might get some notice.
GoG: No linux
I see him saying this is not a bug and asking people to move the discussion elsewhere.
A conclusion is simply the place where someone got tired of thinking.