Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:It's already known (Score 1) 307


The federal government has exclusive sovereignty of U.S. airspace. Congress delegated to the FAA the ability to define “navigable airspace” and the authority to regulate “navigable airspace” of aircraft by regulation or order. 49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(1). While it is clear that navigable airspace falls under the purview of the FAA, the boundaries of that airspace remain unclear.

According to Federal Aviation Regulations, “navigable airspace” is defined as “airspace at and above the minimum flight altitudes prescribed by or under this chapter.... For airplanes, the minimum flight altitude while flying over congested areas or open air assemblies of persons is 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle.... Over uncongested areas, airplanes can operate at an altitude of 500 feet above the surface. However, airplanes can operate even lower when over “open water or sparsely populated areas.” When flying over those areas, aircraft may not operate closer than 500 feet to any person, vehicle, or structure....

Comment Re:It's already known (Score 1) 307

At no point, anywhere, does the FAA indicate the altitude below which you "own" the airspace around private property.

Of course not, the FAA has absolutely no authority over ownership of airspace above private property. You might as well assert that setbacks don't exist because the FAA does not indicate so...

Comment Re:I'm totally shocked... (Score 1) 614

It's a joke that someone can put 40 hours in per week with one employer and still need to work a 2nd job or require government assistance simply to pay the bills and put food on the table.

That's only the setup. The punchline is that thanks to computerized "optimization" of shifts, those kinds of workers don't get told what their schedule is until a few days before, and you know if they miss a shift they're fired, the result of which is that one cannot hold two such jobs.

Comment Re:I'm totally shocked... (Score 1) 614

Well, yeah, you can both be right. Taxes went down, but spending didn't. And of course WHAT we spend on matters, and we spend a lot more of our GDP on social programs than we used to.

Repeat after me: 4 trillion dollars wasted in Iraq, 4 trillion dollars wasted in Iraq...

You know those pie charts showing how government spending is distributed? The GOP ones always show military spending as a minor thing; because the GOP assholes count veteran's "benefits", ie medical care for people who are disabled while serving their country, as entitlements instead of as military spending.

Comment Re:Untrue (Score 1) 765

I realise what you are saying is effectively believed to be true by millions, but its little more than a cultural myth.

A bit of history, young man: it was first widely promoted by Jack Welch in the 80s (IIRC), CEO of GE at the time. Before that, it was an obscure theory by an obscure academic from the 70s (IIRC). Before that, the idea had never even existed.

Companies have responsibility to their shareholders, to their employees, to their customers, to their partners--how they balance those will vary, but the notion that their only responsibility is to shareholders is utter bullshit, promoted by self-serving sociopaths.

Comment Re:So? (Score 1) 751

...cherry picked the exact time frame to allow 40-200m (depending on what source you want to use) to grow into 1 billion...

No cherry picking needed. Let's look at the Russell family of indexes, some of the broadest ones available, covering basically the whole market, from their inception not quite 30 years ago. The Russell 3000 has appreciated 6.8x, the 2000 has appreciated 6.7x.

Slashdot Top Deals

Everybody likes a kidder, but nobody lends him money. -- Arthur Miller