So does InDesign, which uses the TeX algorithm, QuarkXPress, and just about any other application that lays out text. Even Word! Think of that! A program far more suited to laying out a visual medium (i.e., a visual program) could be as good or better than a 35 year old programming language that has a default typeface that's pretty much the most hideous ever designed by humankind (Knuth couldn't have done a worse job on Computer Modern).
Just spent a few minutes reading through your comment history.
"I suggest you try reading anything written by anyone, which would be certain to improve your existing knowledge."
"Please, leave the US."
"This is absolutely, without any doubt, the stupidest, least intelligent and most ridiculous and sensationalist comment ever to appear on the internet, or to be expressed in any other form."
"I can't believe this thought was formed in a human brain."
"No. Can we please stop this adolescent drama? If you think there's a better country, please, leave the US and go there. Do the rest of us a favor."
How about doing the rest of us a favor and ratchet down the hostility and melodrama a notch, mkay? You're not as witty as you think you are.
It's counterintuitive, but now Russia is drifting away from its soviet past. Meanwhile western leaders start to understand that there is a good strategy with uniform democracy: play with envy (all this stuff "reach people should pay more, in order to keep compensation for unemployed, etc"). In some sense, this is motion towards socialism.
There seems to be more questioning of the government though with the ability for people to dissent without being branded as terrorists, communists, etc...
America is so large that it is near impossible to impact the status quo. There is so much blind patriotism and faith in the government that anyone who disagrees is quickly marginalized and branded as unpatriotic. "You don't like it? Leave."
Since the US was formed the French have lived through five republics and a few empires. They know that government is provisional. This probably explains why they are so protective of their culture. There are still people alive today who lived under German rule.
What's a reasonable alternative? Anarchy? The "state" -- most rational people would say "government" -- you discuss is a collection of municipal, state and federal government, with differing goals and political orientations, and how should spectrum be allocated other than by a government agency? Where is it done differently? So I can't publish a book without the government's approval of it? Which government? Which agency approves books? As another poster said, what is correct in your post? You have to justify such ridiculous claims that are contradictory to reality.
You know, it's not me who must provide a proof that "state is bad". It's other people who should prove how a construction called constitution + law + police + voting justifies violence of the police, soldiers and prison guards.
It is pretty obvious that any "law" or "regulation" is a description of punishment by taking your body or your property by force. Normally you are supposed to bring them yourself when politely asked, but you do that only because otherwise you'll be forced to under a gunpoint.
Also I don't need to describe to you how a happy society will live without centralized violence. It's up to every individual where and how to live. What I'm doing here on HN is simply pointing out the nature of the state and how it creates all the problems people are pissed off about. When people stop apologizing for state violence and simply understand that it is never justified, then we can talk seriously on alternatives. Thankfully, libertarians and anarchists have written tons of books already. But if you believe in state, you will never take a serious look at peaceful solutions.
This is absolutely, without any doubt, the stupidest, least intelligent and most ridiculous and sensationalist comment ever to appear on the internet, or to be expressed in any other form. What reasons do almost all countries have for wanting to see the US destroyed? What reasons do these countries that hate the US so much have to destroy the entirety of world trade? I can't believe this thought was formed in a human brain.
Let's try to remember that Roberts is appointing individuals from the existing set of federal judges -- i.e., people who have already been appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the United States Senate as judges.
>>Congress can recall any FISC judge
I don't think Congress has an ability to withdraw a judge. The only check on an individual judge is the term limits which has been ruled before not to matter in its determination that the FISA court acts like an article III court. Congress simply couldn't remove a judge except though impeachment.
I am pretty sure that Congress could do so a thing. Just because it ACTS like an Article III court doesn't mean it is one and since Congress created the whole thing, they can also change the whole thing.
Appellant invokes the principles of judicial independence and separation of powers that underlie article III, [citations omitted], but those principles are not implicated by appellant's speculation that a judge designated to the FISA court might be influenced by the possibility that his temporary assignment might be revoked. By statute, federal judges may be designated by the Chief Justice to serve temporarily on other courts, 28 U.S.C. §§ 291-296 (1982), and temporary designation within the federal judicial system has never been thought to undermine the judicial independence that article III was intended to secure.
A judge's appointment to the FISA court can be revoked (I emphasized this part above; the revocation, of course, can be enacted by Congress), but the judge still has a job for life - in the District Court.
The fact that FISA judges are article III judges does not make FISA an article III court. It is a court created by Congress, which is staffed by people who are already Article III judges. Cavanagh's attack on the independence of FISA judges is rooted in the fact that the assignment can be revoked.
Are you sure that's what that means? Reading the cases that decision cites in the "unbroken line" of failed separation of powers claims against FISA, nothing I've read unequivocally states that FISC is an Article III court, which makes sense to me because FISC is more unlike a federal court than like one.
It's perfectly reasonable to enjoy most of the things about a country and still find issues with it. It's also perfectly reasonable to question and complain about stuff when you think it's wrong. Not doing that, putting your fingers in your ears and running away is arguably the worse crime.
Which is funny since many of the US wealthy regard their homes outsides the States as bailout refuges if the situation in the States gets hostile to them. (Which is probably a good insurance policy...)
The inequality adjusted HDI says there are exactly 15 countries better than the US in the world.
Also, don't you find it a tiny bit ironic that your response to him was childish and immature e.g. "Well you can leave, if you don't like something". If everyone was like you, we'd have no progress, no revolution, and no change.
Just because other countries do bad things, it doesn't mean that you should put up with your representatives doing the same bad things (and blatantly lying to you about them).
