You raise interesting points
You raise interesting points
Where does the FAA claim it gets the power to regulate drones which are only engaged in INTRA-state commerce and flying too low to interfere with interstate air traffic? Seems to me that's the state's job.
(Similarly with the FCC and radio signals that are too weak to be decoded outside the state of origin or substantially interfere with reasonable interstate services. Sure "radio goes on forever". But so does sound - with the same inverse-square law and similar interference characteristics - and we get along just fine without federal regulation of speech and bullhorns.)
I believe the correct answer is not only do you not change the money, you are obliged to contact the police and report the person.
Yes and no respectively. But if the cops ask you, you have to answer honestly or you're an accessory... unless they're asking about your spouse, then you don't have to answer. Whee!
Science fiction is a reflection of today's society.
So why is there so little gay crew?
ST:TOS made TV history in the 1960's with the first interracial kiss when the civil rights movement was ongoing. I'm sure critics called that pandering as well.
I'm sure they did. But the difference is that Trek isn't breaking any ground here whatsoever, and they're going against the wishes of both the original, revered creator (who envisioned the character as straight) and the actor who made the role famous. Put it all together, and it spells fail.
I am not offended by gay characters. I am offended by this senseless pandering. Not because it's gay, but because it's senseless.
Obviously 99% of the crews of Star Trek ships could've been automated away, but who wants to watch a TV series about machines?
It's not that obvious, if you take the Trek universe as a given. There's a bunch of times when the people kept working when the machines didn't, so they clearly were not redundant.
Are you seriously comparing merit-based science and technology awards to the f**ing Nobel peace prize?
I don't take any award seriously absent a reason to do so.
Just curious, did you defend Microsoft as a private Monopoly? Do you realize that Facebook has over 1 billion people on their platform and that they effectively have a monopoly on social media? Do you think it's okay for a monopoly to abuse their position to promote a particular ideology? Would you feel the same way if they promoted right wing content instead?
When will people wake up and realize the fix is in? You know those ties between the media and the Democrats that the right complained about for years? Have you realized yet that the question about using facebook to prevent a Trump presidency wasn't rhetorical?
Bernie's supporters have started to wake up and realize that they are just as excluded as the right. The only difference now is that things are being exposed in plain text for the world to see. Only big business and congress have worse credibility ratings that the media.
Wake up sheeple.
Nondeterminism means never having to say you are wrong.