I don't disagree in principle, but there are very sound arguments for not allowing people to be armed in a pressurized compartment with 200+ people crammed in it. Additionally I wonder if the type of person who arms himself for flight would have risked bodily injury by wrestling this guy to the ground or if he would have 'subdued' the perp perminantly, thus depriving the alphabet agencies of a valuable intelligence resource.

We'll see, I suppose. What I've heard is consistent (to the extent I know anything about the subject) with a primer charge failing to detonate some poorly manufactured explosive. I certainly prefer to think that some important plot was foiled, since on some level it seems that there is a practical maximum number of serious plots, but an essentially unlimited number of idiots.

Have you seen the Beckian conspiracy diagrams? These tend to involve or implicate thousands of individuals. A diagram of the Bush/Cheney email/DOJ/bad intelligence/Plame conspiracies would collectively require fewer arrows than Obama's nefarious plan to eliminate the meal of Dinner.

Again, the problem is that for a corporation, like paypal, it is entirely reasonable to spend $100k to preserve the enforceability of a user agreement, therefore the corporation would be able to recover $100k from the Plaintiff, even if the Plaintiff's demand was $1k.

The amount was chosen because it was McDonalds coffee sales for a day (or week or something). It wasn't to compensate the woman, but to punish McD for perceived uncivil behavior. Think the Pinto writ small (pint size you might say. Because , see the cups...)

Sufficient, but inefficient because it increases the transaction costs for consumers who must RTFM for every potential purchase. By establishing minimal standards, regulation encourages the buying of goods.

You probably would have had to read it anyway. Shirley Jackson never even drove past my HS and I had to read it more than once.

Thank you for attempting to nip this unconventional wisdom factoid in the bud.

I read a pseudo-memoir called Farmington (uninteresting except for who wrote it) and the author writes about his love of summer vacation in rural Pennsylvania the 1880's or so.

You are trading one fiction for another. Offhand I'd say that this obscures the value of the work, and more importantly deprives the public free access to the work for a longer time because we'd have to wait for both Mrs. and Miss Grant to die.

This case illustrates the value of having copyright extend beyond the life of the author, since it was his daughter who seemed to suffer for Joyce's art. A better example is US Grant, who was near penniless and diagnosed with cancer and wrote his well regarded memoir hoping to providing for his wife and daughter.

http://www.scorecard.org/ranking/ was the first google hit for "pollution for state" VA is ahead of CA in Total Toxic Chemical Emissions.

Although most of the BoR is now applied against the states, even the most ardent States Rightist must concede that the 10th Amendment reservation of powers suggests that it has always been anticipated that the states would (and should be permitted to) do things that the either expressly forbidden or not iplicitly permitted to Federal Government.

FTL is easier, because all you have to do is go a little faster once you hit light speed.

You may be sick of it, but it is the key point. My recollection is that design patents always seemed not worth pursuing and when pursued not worth granting; I imagine most "just a design patent" commentators have the same impression. I understand your frustration at the lack of citations and half-assedly looked up design patents.

Emmanuel Outlines are not legal authorities, but p C-14 of Margreth Barret's IP outline states that 1) the standard for infringement is similar to trademark infringement and 2) when a patented design encompasses both functional and ornamental elements it must be common ornamental features that confuse Joe User. FWIW. IANLTPLIAJ.

I haven't seen the movie and your review semi-confirms the suspicions that made me not want to see it. I'm always glad when SF takes on Big Ideas, but if you are going to lecure me I expect the same level of care in mechanics as in message. This means aliens burned by water do not invade a planet with rain and oceans and squirtguns without at least putting on some clothing. Children of Men suffered from similar logical flaws, as did the sequel to 28 Days Later. Aliens in posession of superior technology should use it to their advantage, or failing that, a minimally competant government should deliver a whole assload of buttermilk (sorry) catfood to completely disarm the aliens. Maybe the filmmakers address this point with a global catfood shortage, fair enough. The last film that engendered this level of loyalty was Equilibrium: a steamy load of allegory made outside Hollywood that was, if nothing else, at last as sloppy in its message as in its mechanics. Maybe District 9 is better than Equilibrium, but if the commercials suggests WTF-level plot holes it will take more than a creamy review from Knowles to get me in the theater. I'm glad to read one post that allows that I may not be completely wasting my life between now and whenever I get the movie from Netflix.