I read the entire article and CA laws seem monumentally complicated. I honestly gave myself a migraine after reading the various interpretations.
I was on vacation in California when Prop 22 was trending on Twitter. So I did some digging to see what all the commotion was about.
It's interesting that the court doesn't really take issue with the content of the ballot initiative itself but has issues with how it is implemented. Thanks again for clarifying the legal subtleties.
Not exactly true -- I've worked at a homeless shelter in Utah for nearly three years. We recently built an apartment complex for those in an impoverished situation and it has been very successful. It is worth noting that 80%of the funding for this project came from community donations. The remaining 20% was from a government grant.
See my comment above for one of the major reasons for homelessness and a major step to take to fix it.
nonsense like this going on in the US just depresses me. Little by little, line upon line, pretense upon pretense the freedoms expressed by the Constitution and moral law are being usurped by those sworn to uphold these ideals. It just makes me sad and angry. More so since there isn't anything that anyone anywhere has power to effect change; so all we do is complain about it and watch the cycle repeat.
Although it's nice to see someone in the court system with a brain stem not letting the FBI get away with this nonsense.
I've worked at a homeless shelter for nearly three years. Want to know what would be the best change possible for this situation? Nearly 80% in shelter right now are struggling with drug addiction (of those about 25% self medicated due to mental health issues).
The solution: End the war on drugs. Treat drug addiction as a social issue and not a criminal issue. This way people struggling with drug addiction can get the treatment and help they need without fearing being incarcerated for the victimless crime of injecting, ingesting, or smoking something bad for them.
This isn't the end all solution to ending poverty (there are many facets to this issue including education, housing availability, job market, access to affordable health care, etc.), but ending the failed war on drugs would be a gigantic step forward in helping those who are in an impoverished situation.
People who burn the flag in public could be fined or jailed for public endangerment. Fined for environmental violations (depending on if it is in a nanny state).
There are a couple of others I thought of but the government has too much power as it is and I don't want to give them more ideas.
I was happy to see in the comments people calling out Techdirt on framing a religious group in a negative light due to the actions of individuals who happen to be members of that group.
I'm disappointed in Techdirt with this sort of shoddy reporting.
To drive this point home here is the article framing it against a different group:
This resulted in the city dropping the charges against Hunt. Then Hunt decided to sue the city and, magically, the charges -- pushed by a new city attorney (and local black leader) -- reappeared. City Attorney and local black man Steve Morris rang Hunt up for the original charge plus a few more.
Hunt's lawyer complained on Facebook about the bogus charges. This led the municipal judge (and "good" negro) Victor Miller to hand down a completely unconstitutional gag order forbidding Hunt's lawyer from discussing the case anywhere but in court.
Now again just to drive the point further home:
This resulted in the city dropping the charges against Hunt. Then Hunt decided to sue the city and, magically, the charges -- pushed by a new city attorney (and local gay leader) -- reappeared. City Attorney and local homosexual Steve Morris rang Hunt up for the original charge plus a few more.
Hunt's lawyer complained on Facebook about the bogus charges. This led the municipal judge (and good homo) Victor Miller to hand down a completely unconstitutional gag order forbidding Hunt's lawyer from discussing the case anywhere but in court.
It's not that GOG doesn't support Linux (they offer many titles that do). GOG is not the decider on if a title will support Linux or not -- it's the developers who create the games that make that choice.
Flawed argument here. Claim: One company did okay despite piracy therefore copyright law is unnecessary.
Rebuttal: Others have already pointed out that the article in question isn't about copyright. But the entire premise of the claim is wrong in the fact that SEVERAL examples exist where companies have successfully competed with free.
"Trump is a profoundly regressive force whose actions and statements are dangerous. And he’s being enabled. Congress has abdicated its role as a check to presidential power. The Supreme Court is no longer committed to protecting minority rights. The result: an irrational and unrestrained president threatens the future of our country as a pluralistic constitutional democracy."
The problem with this reporting is that is all claims with no supporting evidence of these claims. Yes this takes a side (anti-Trump) but without evidence it's just yet another slanted "news" story.
Comparison to M$ is a valid one. Mid 90's M$ discovered that Novell (their major competitor at the time) was using Visual C++ as their language and compiler for their network card firmware. So M$ _intentionally_ included a bug in their C++ compiler/linker if it detected that is was being used by Novell. Took us ages to figure out why firmware built using the latest version of VC++ would crap out (at execution time). If memory serves when M$ was confronted with this they claimed that the bug was unintentional and part of a security patch -- I don't believe this for one nanosecond, but make of it what you will.
Apple has enough people drinking their Koolaid that they can get away with crap like this.