They try to tell SpaceX how hard reusability is.
I’ve got to run some errands, but I’ll have some comments later. Briefly, though, Dumbacher’s comparison with the SSME is pretty much worthless.
They try to tell SpaceX how hard reusability is.
I’ve got to run some errands, but I’ll have some comments later. Briefly, though, Dumbacher’s comparison with the SSME is pretty much worthless.
…has been awarded.
In his inimitable way, Mark Steyn explains:
The way the DC “legislature” wrote the Anti-SLAPP law it’s unclear whether a denial of an anti-SLAPP motion is appealable. So my co-defendants would like the Court of Appeals to rule on the question. They could have ruled on it way back last autumn when the denial of the motion to dismiss the original complaint was appealed, but by then Michael E Mann, whose original complaint was as poorly constructed as his hockey stick, had filed his amended complaint, so the Court of Appeals ruled that it was moot. If you’re wondering what “it” is in that last clause, “it” is any combination of: a) the original complaint; b) the original motion to dismiss the original complaint; c) the original denial of the original motion to dismiss the original complaint; d) the original appeal of the original denial of the original motion to dismiss the original complaint; e) the original appeal of whether the original appeal of the original denial of the original motion to dismiss the original complaint is appealable; or f) a gluten-free chia-seed bagel three days past its sell-by date left under the judges’ desk.
Or something.
The world seems to disappoint Barack Obama.
My expectations were so low it was never possible for him to disappoint me.
Via Ed Driscoll, who has further commentary.
[Update a few minutes later]
@JammieWF "This world, Barack, was never meant for one as beautiful as you." https://t.co/SdIg747hNo
— Joel Engel (@joelengel) May 6, 2014
I’ve been taking an 81 mg dose for heart-attack/stroke prevention, but maybe I shouldn’t be.
And how did they come up with 81 for the dosage? Why not a round number?
It’s not really a new thing, but this is the latest indication that most universities aren’t. They clearly want a diversity in everything except opinion.
[Update a few minutes later]
“I blame Rice as much as the bullies. By withdrawing, Rice sends a message to other campuses that the tactic works.”
Sadly, yes.
Andrew McCarthy: “Don’t draft Andrew McCarthy.”
While he would be good, it would damage the credibility of the committee to bring in a counsel whose mind is clearly already made up.
…will soon be reshaped by people who don’t use email:
as Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Parker Higgins convincingly argues, it’s not the justices’ lack of personal experience with technology that’s the problem; it’s their tendency to not understand how people use it. Returning to Justice Roberts’s concerns about villains with two phones: if he is in fact unaware of how common that behavior is – he certainly didn’t watch Breaking Bad – then that suggests a major gap in his understanding of society.
This lack of basic understanding is alarming, because the supreme court is really the only branch of power poised to confront one of the great challenges of our time: catching up our laws to the pace of innovation, defending our privacy against the sprint of surveillance. The NSA is “training more cyberwarriors” as fast as it can, but our elected representatives move at a snail’s pace when it comes to the internet. The US Congress has proven itself unable to pass even the most uncontroversial proposals, let alone comprehensive NSA reforms: the legislative branch can’t even get its act together long enough to pass an update our primary email privacy law, which was written in 1986 – before the World Wide Web had been invented.
So the future of our privacy, of our technology – these problems land at the feet of a handful of tech-unsavvy judges.
Kind of scary.
Can Congress sue the president for not faithfully executing the laws?
Sure seems like it to me. It would be nice to see what the Founders intended: checks and balances between the branches, instead of between political parties.
Apropos of nothing in particular, David Rifkin is one of my attorneys in the Mann suit.
[Update a while later]
Why are the House and Senate surrendering so much power to the Executive branch?
The American people do not understand what their congressmen and women are saying. Simply put, the legislative branch is legislating the American people out of their favor with bills that both they, and the American people, cannot understand. Legislators need to understand their own bills. The American people need to understand. The American people want to understand. The president is more appealing and more trusted than the Congress because his message is simpler. The president’s message, delivered in friendly, fatherly sound bites, is comprehensible to the people. It is clear, concise and easy to understand. Congress’ message with 2,700 page bills and 1,200 page bills is simply incomprehensible, unfathomable. Consequentially, legislators are deemed untrustworthy by the American people.
The legislators in the legislative branch need to act and they need to act quickly, very, very quickly. They need to pass rules that limit their own largess in order to prevent the progressives’ “legislators are corrupt” campaign from succeeding. They need to save our country by returning the people’s house to the people. They have let it be run by lawyers. They have leveled Americans’ trust with legalese.
The legislators need to simplify, simplify, simplify. They can start by reducing the number of pages in their bills and by summarizing their objectives. Comprehensive bills are compromising our republican form of government. The American people are turning to the wrong branch of government – the executive branch, the president, the branch that is most vulnerable to tyranny and corruption. Ironically, the American people are trusting the branch that can enact the most uncensored control over the people if left unchecked.
Maybe no so much any more, though, fortunately. At least judging by recent polling.
Now that we know that saturated fat is actually the best kind for us, it would make a world of sense for them to go back to cooking them in tallow. It would be healthier, it was what made them taste great in the old days, and it would save them money given how it would just be a bi-product of the beef that they already mass produce.