Slashdot Mirror

Then learn to goole maybe?

http://www.newser.com/story/125261/mexican-helicopter-mistakes-airports-lands-in-texas.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2023633/Mexican-military-helicopter-soldiers-lands-airport-Texas--MISTAKE.html
http://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/article/Mexican-military-helicopter-lands-in-Laredo-by-2082188.php
https://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com/2010/03/12/mexican-military-helicopter-spotted-flying-over-texas/
http://texasliberal.wordpress.com/2010/04/03/mexican-helicopters-flying-over-texas-would-obama-respond-to-mexican-invasion-with-use-of-force/
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread557760/pg1
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110905191138AAP32Xj
http://www.valleycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=429229#.US-m5WJ2n4Y

BTW, the idea of a Mexican helicopter "mistakenly" landing 16 miles away from its target is utterly ridiculous. No competent pilot would ever make such a mistake; that's why they have GPS in aircraft now, not to mention basic navigational skills and fuel-burn calculations (plus the Rio Grande river, which is obvious from the air) rule this excuse out.

That zombiecatcopter is out there.
It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until they are dead.

They trotted out the old CCTV thing, so I'm guessing they're a Mail reader.

Well, whaddya know?

It was probably just an isolated incident of a bobby getting uppity, since Swiss army knives are explicitly categorised as legal to carry in public if you have good reason. Perhaps aforementioned bobby thought carrying one in a car in case of fruit cravings wasn't justified... personally I don't see the problem with keeping one in the glove box. In any event, this sort of sensationalism is just what we've come to expect from that squalid little rag; I wouldn't be surprised one bit to find a rant about most disabled people being benefit cheats on the next page.

Well, since I'm pretty sure I've yet to hear anybody talking about deploying these drones for cargo purposes,

There's this pilotless helicopter
And this patented concept
And this article from PopSci

So yeah...no one is considering that type of use.

Well, that's because you've taken a bunch of random laws that in most cases are bi-partisan (mandatory seat belts? You mean that law Margaret Thatcher passed in the early eighties? Believe she passed the helmet thing too), classified them as "leftist" (you do know that term loses all meaning when you apply it to anything you consider left wing, right?) and tried to find some fear based reasoning for them.

The problem is it doesn't work. Seat belts mandated out of fear? Why would I fear you not wearing your seat belt? Or motorcycle helmet? I mean, you might come up with a justification for saying the two were invented because of fear, but not a law making them mandatory.

Why are they mandatory? I believe it's an insurance thing. My insurance goes up if you don't wear your selt belt and get horribly mangled (yet decide to survive, you selfish bastard) and require extremely expensive medical treatment as a result.

Gun free zones? Again, not getting the fear aspect. You don't want little Jonny taking some gun he found in the teacher's drawer and pointing it at little Sammy and saying "Bam" and then little Sammy is dead and Jonny is all tearful. Is it right? We can debate that. Is it more based upon fear than, say, a health and safety ordinance requiring asbestos be kept out of schools? Not that I can think of.

Hate speech? What does that have to do with fear? Seriously? And how many people on the left promote anti-HS laws anyway? I don't know any. I'm not saying they don't exist, but for the most part where they HS laws appear they're passed by most moderate politicians, with far left and far right generally disapproving. And what's their motive? Generally a belief that hate speech promotes hate, and hate is bad, and we should have a nice society.

Kind of like when conservatives ban nipples or rude words. Now, that's not to say that I don't think there aren't conservatives out there who are all out terrified of nipples, but we know that actually conservatives demand they be banned from TV etc is ultimately because conservatives want some kind of "wholesome" society, at least, as conservatives define it.

So of all the examples you gave, none are examples of fear, and none are particularly left wing.

Offered for your consideration.

A Swiss genetics company has claimed that up to 70 per cent of British men are related to the Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamun.

Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, say they have reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.

The results showed that 'King Tut' belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50 per cent of all men in Western Europe belong, indicating that they share a common ancestor.

Among modern-day Egyptians this haplogroup contingent is below 1 per cent, according to iGENEA.

Happens in the UK too:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2232954/Innocent-female-motorist-34-killed-gang-staged-crash-cash-insurance-scam-busy-motorway.html

It starts, with a killer asteroid hurling towards the earth.

Our hero is summoned, and immediately springs into action.

He sets out with his trusty weapon to save the world from the danger of the week.

After a long and awesome journey, he finally reach his destination.

Finally there, he slowly takes aim, breathes, and fire at The Killer Meteor. The meteor, alerted to his presence, fights back. What follows is a long action sequence only slowing down now and then so our hero can do manly poses.

After a long battle, and lots of shooting and fishing was done, there was only a small fragment left, just enough to spend the CGI budget, and show everyone how dangerous The Killer Meteor could have been.

No one was killed, and the world was again saved thanks to our hero.

The End.

At least he didn't make it to Zaghreb...

Do you really think once DRM is in place in every browser and is a W3C standard, it will only be used for movies?
I could think that Google, Facebook, Twitter, Dropbox, Amazon Cloud, etc. are perfectly able to leverage DRM once it is in every browser.
Facebook is already claiming all pictures of you as theirs:
Facebook to sell your photos: Social media giant claims it owns the rights to ALL your Instagram pictures

The only obstacle right now is that to enforce DRM you need to use Flash or Silverlight. But once you open up the floodgate...

Uh, no, it's not banned. The only thing it can't contain are the lungs (or lights), since they are extremely perishable.
Lungs are a no-no

Haggis vendor 1
Haggis vendor 2
Haggis vendor we use for our Burn's Night
Canned haggis (it's not bad, but it ain't traditional)
Lungless, low-fat haggis (ick!)

As for battery life, I appreciate them making the things slim, but if they'd make it another 5mm or even 8mm thicker with most of that extra volume given to battery, you'd get about four times as much life out of it. Does anyone make a phone like this?

Ask this guy.

Stephen Hawking says time travel is possible. Maybe some day, but I doubt even your great great great grandchildren will see FTL or time travel.

Google Glass is no more augmenting reality than a TV set is.

If it were rendering also the view behind it so there was no loss of vision, then it would be augmented reality. As it is it's the same as if you strapped your cell phone on an arm attached to your head a foot out or so.

But that is exactly what it does.

Its a HUD, projecting a mostly transparent overlay on what you see behind it. Further, it only covers one eye. So it could show navigation arrows without occluding your vision of the road.

Meets my definition of augmented reality.

It goes far, far beyond even what you're thinking: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2187801/Were-watching-The-camera-recognise-Facebook-picture-time-walk-shop.html

Facebook is putting their own cameras in public with built in facial recognition software. They will track everywhere you go, what you do while you're there, what you buy, what you eat, what you look at and don't buy. Every single thing you do will be logged in their databases, and then sold to... well... pretty much everyone. How much do you want to bet their biggest customer will be the federal government?

It appears that Orwell was off by about 30 years when he wrote 1984.

The article explicitly says that Facebook did not develop the system and that it is simply an app that uses Facebook's APIs. There's no need for you to mislead people by saying that Facebook is installing their own cameras.

It goes far, far beyond even what you're thinking:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2187801/Were-watching-The-camera-recognise-Facebook-picture-time-walk-shop.html

Facebook is putting their own cameras in public with built in facial recognition software. They will track everywhere you go, what you do while you're there, what you buy, what you eat, what you look at and don't buy. Every single thing you do will be logged in their databases, and then sold to... well... pretty much everyone. How much do you want to bet their biggest customer will be the federal government?

It appears that Orwell was off by about 30 years when he wrote 1984.

Ah, an other person who has drunk the US NAVY's cool aid.
US carriers are notoriously vulnerable to diesel submarines who run on batteries. On nuclear subs, the engine never gets shut, they are inherently noisier than diesel submarines. More than once US Carrier fleets got a nasty surprise when a submarine surfaced quite near to them. (shame, link for Daily Scarymail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492804/The-uninvited-guest-Chinese-sub-pops-middle-U-S-Navy-exercise-leaving-military-chiefs-red-faced.html#axzz2JgOdt8mi)

Police is not perfect, but machine guns in every house is not a solution. Better police work is a solution, that seems to be working quite well in civilized countries.

Yes, I'm sure that will work great! Women are twice as likely to be raped in the UK as they are in the US. Burglaries which take place while the occupants are home are virtually unheard of in the US, but in the UK they are more common than break-ins when the occupants aren't home.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-25671/Violent-crime-worse-Britain-US.html#axzz2Jg0nIXQx
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/7922755/England-has-worse-crime-rate-than-the-US-says-Civitas-study.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jul/14/crime-statistics-england-wales

All that "better police work" they have over there, right? Let's agree to live and let live. You keep your "better police work" and I'll keep my guns.

Apologies for not adding this link to my previous post: Daily Mail article about UK "Death Panels", which is made all the more amusing because in the first picture it looks like President Obama is trying to strangle Stephen Hawking!

Well, I used avalanche as a metaphor - not a simile. The snow flakes on the mountain side does not have the ability to decide if they wish to participate in an avalanche - physics decides that for it.

The press, on the other hand, DOES have the ability to decide, and yes, that does include the hosts.

But consider this - what if no other media had picked up the story and run with it? Would she still have committed suicide? Unfortunately we won't know.

But here's a thought. For all the blame throwing that has happened in that particular case, I find it interesting that I haven't stumbled across a single article with introspection into news organizations' own roles in her suicide. Case in point - it was a rather lame joke, and the Mail Online/Daily Mail turned it into a 3,000 word article the next day, saying in nice big fat letters: "How could they fall for this hoax?"

Nah - that kind of massively overblown reaction and witch hunt couldn't possibly add to the stress she was already under.

That same paper has an article: Being stressed is as damaging for your heart as smoking five cigarettes a day

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2250106/Stress-bad-heart-smoking-cigarettes-day.html 18 December 2012.

Be honest with me here - would this discussion be interesting in those newspapers? The more I read about the nurse, I'm thinking I should sit down and do some journalistic work into the media's role in the situation.

I'm on sick leave and have lots of time on my hands, and I suspect that I would quite love to ream "da man" and society at large.

Good idea or dead at conception?

Well, I used avalanche as a metaphor - not a simile. The snow flakes on the mountain side does not have the ability to decide if they wish to participate in an avalanche - physics decides that for it.

The press, on the other hand, DOES have the ability to decide, and yes, that does include the hosts.

But consider this - what if no other media had picked up the story and run with it? Would she still have committed suicide? Unfortunately we won't know.

But here's a thought. For all the blame throwing that has happened in that particular case, I find it interesting that I haven't stumbled across a single article with introspection into news organizations' own roles in her suicide. Case in point - it was a rather lame joke, and the Mail Online/Daily Mail turned it into a 3,000 word article the next day, saying in nice big fat letters: "How could they fall for this hoax?"

Nah - that kind of massively overblown reaction and witch hunt couldn't possibly add to the stress she was already under.

That same paper has an article: Being stressed is as damaging for your heart as smoking five cigarettes a day

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2250106/Stress-bad-heart-smoking-cigarettes-day.html 18 December 2012.

Be honest with me here - would this discussion be interesting in those newspapers? The more I read about the nurse, I'm thinking I should sit down and do some journalistic work into the media's role in the situation.

I'm on sick leave and have lots of time on my hands, and I suspect that I would quite love to ream "da man" and society at large.

Good idea or dead at conception?

Well, I used avalanche as a metaphor - not a simile. The snow flakes on the mountain side does not have the ability to decide if they wish to participate in an avalanche - physics decides that for it.

The press, on the other hand, DOES have the ability to decide, and yes, that does include the hosts.

But consider this - what if no other media had picked up the story and run with it? Would she still have committed suicide? Unfortunately we won't know.

But here's a thought. For all the blame throwing that has happened in that particular case, I find it interesting that I haven't stumbled across a single article with introspection into news organizations' own roles in her suicide. Case in point - it was a rather lame joke, and the Mail Online/Daily Mail turned it into a 3,000 word article the next day, saying in nice big fat letters: "How could they fall for this hoax?"

Nah - that kind of massively overblown reaction and witch hunt couldn't possibly add to the stress she was already under.

That same paper has an article: Being stressed is as damaging for your heart as smoking five cigarettes a day

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2250106/Stress-bad-heart-smoking-cigarettes-day.html 18 December 2012.

Be honest with me here - would this discussion be interesting in those newspapers? The more I read about the nurse, I'm thinking I should sit down and do some journalistic work into the media's role in the situation.

I'm on sick leave and have lots of time on my hands, and I suspect that I would quite love to ream "da man" and society at large.

Good idea or dead at conception?

Apart from the stupidity of using real infrastructure instead of false ones, or at last empty highways, what if one guy mistakenly took real ammo instead of blank ones?
Don't tell me it can't happen, it already has in France.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1030442/Horror-French-military-17-people-seriously-hurt-live-bullets-fired-crowd.html

17 people hurt, and it was with firearms during the day.
Now imagine a Blackhawk at night...

Those radio personalities were, in some part, responsible for the actions of the nurse for it was they who made the final push.

I don't think they made the final push. One of the nurses three suicide letters criticized senior hospital staff - while I haven't read any of the letters (I don't think they've been made public), I read that as her being violently reamed by administration for what is really a tiny issue.

That being said, according to MailOnline she did blame them for it.

Personally, I don't think the radio hosts were responsible for the final push - what they did was to set off an avalanche of undue criticism, particularly undue, as she didn't do anything other than patch the hosts through to another nurse.

And really, if you read the news after the prank call on December 4th but before the suicide on December 7th, you'd have read about it. Google gives 400+ hits on that search.

ABC News. The Mirror. The Telegraph. The Star. USA Today. Fox News. The list goes on. That's not just a silly joke playing out on some radio show with a limited audience - that's world wide. For fuck's sake, it was covered as basically breaking news that the world HAD to know and be outraged about.

Personally, I can't say if it something that'd make me try suicide again, but I highly doubt I would lay all the blame at the pranksters' feet. Being the victim of a joke isn't always funny even afterwards - but then being subjected to that amount of quite frankly ludicrous public scrutiny of an honest mistake, I wouldn't put it past me to break at that.

So no - even if the nurse laid the blame squarely at the hosts' feet, I will go on record as saying that that is a very unfair and unreasonable claim to make.

I did a load of background reading on this yesterday so here's some interesting related material. One interesting source is the NASA guidelines for li-ion use in space :
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20090023862_2009023573.pdf

Now NASA I think have a pretty good track record of thinking technologies through carefully... (By the by, did you know that GS Yuasa also have a contract to supply their li-ion batteries to NASA for use in the ISS?)

Also, did you know that prior to the 787 the Cessna CJ4 was the first civili aircraft to utilise li-ion batteries (supplied by a123). In 2011 there was a fire onboard one whilst it was connected to a ground power unit. As a result the FAA ordered all 42 in operation to be changed to conventional ni-cd or lead acid.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-11-01/html/2011-27596.htm

This is interesting as it's similar i.e. on the ground. This of course *could* be coincidental.

Next up are lots of interesting pictures from the NTSB investigation. Much as I HATE to link to the Daily Mail (normally a pretty retarded publication) I couldn't find any other pic sources. Bizarre :
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2268152/Boeing-787-Dreamliners-burnt-battery-spewed-molten-electrolytes-reveal-investigators.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

And some great source material from the NTSB themselves :
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/2013/boeing_787/boeing_787.html

And the NTSB update on the investigation (including some samples of their cell CT scans) :
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/2013/boeing_787/JAL_B-787_1-24-13.pdf

NTSB Primer on li-ion battery tech :
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/2013/boeing_787/Primer_LIB_Technology.pdf

One of the theories being talked about are the fact that the li-ion batteries that Boieng (via Thales) decided on are based on a lithium cobalt oxide cathode which is old tech and regarded as not exactly the safest variant of li-ion technology out there :
http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=257987
and via a translation :
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=no&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tu.no%2Findustri%2F2013%2F01%2F17%2Fher-er-dreamliner-problemet

This EEtimes article has some interesting comments :
http://cdn.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4405441/787-Dreamliner-investigation-probes-battery-charging-electronic

And some info from GS Yuasa :
http://www.s399157097.onlinehome.us/SpecSheets/LVP10-65.pdf

All interesting stuff. Personally I think they shouldn't have been allowed to 'trial' li-ion on such a big aircraft especially after the cessna incident. Trying so many new tricks at once isn't wise - as engineers always say, just change one thing at a time...

People do not commit suicide because of a single thing. It's not the rape alone that makes rape victims suicidal, it's the associated shame, social isolation, finger pointing and blame (it's never the victim's fault) as well, and those come from society - not the rapist, no matter how despicable the crime is.

So what are you saying here - if someone is raped, were previously fine, but then kill themselves because of shame that it is not the rapists fault? If not when is anything totally anyone's fault - if I beat you and left you in constant pain and paralysed then it would be your perception of pain and societies's provision and reaction to disabled that did it!

Pinning Swartz' suicide on overzealous prosecutors is as fair as pinning Jacintha Saldanha's suicide on the radio hosts.

In both cases they started a course of events that lead to someone committing suicide. Their degree of blame depends on to what degree they could have foreseen the risk, and to what degree they could have seen any unjust negative consequences for the victim (e.g. if I want to make you feel bad and you end up killing yourself I am more to blame than if I accidentally bring up a touchy subject that leads to it.). There is no doubt tough that to some extent they are to blame.

He had a choice - fight and go bankrupt, then to jail. Plead guilty and goto jail, Or take his own life.

That is a really, REALLY unfair claim to make.

And I say that as someone with multiple suicide attempts behind me (yes, I'm a failure, I know), so allow me to rephrase that.

That is a really, REALLY stupid and ignorant claim to make. There - much better.

People do not commit suicide because of a single thing. It's not the rape alone that makes rape victims suicidal, it's the associated shame, social isolation, finger pointing and blame (it's never the victim's fault) as well, and those come from society - not the rapist, no matter how despicable the crime is.

Pinning Swartz' suicide on overzealous prosecutors is as fair as pinning Jacintha Saldanha's suicide on the radio hosts. It may be a contributing factor, but not the only one.

People are WAY too keen to blame a single thing (person or otherwise) as the cause for whatever evil they see, and are WAY too scared of thinking let alone saying that people may have a mental illness. Just look at how quick people are to blame video games for the acts of murderers these days.

You don't attempt suicide (successfully or otherwise) if you're not mentally ill, be it temporary, short term, long term or chronic.

Yes, he made the choice to take his own life. He also made the choice of knowingly breaking the law (unreasonable or not). Rosa Parks made a similar decision as did Nelson Mandela and many others around the world. But unlike Swartz, they didn't choose to take their own life.

And you can say a lot of things about the US prison system, but I'm pretty sure it is a LOT more comfortable than what Mandela went through.

You don't even need to visit China to read about industrial accidents. Motorway accidents for travelling sales staff are just as dangerous:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/aberdeen/worker-loses-his-hands-in-industrial-press-accident-1.280310

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2168607/Woman-25-intensive-care-SCALPED-hair-got-caught-machine-work.html

http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2011/coi-e-4211.htm

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4752201/Scalped-mum-nearly-killed-after-her-hair-catches-in-a-machine.html

The problem with time travel is that there is no analytical method to say what would happen, since we have absolutely no clue how or if time travel would work in any way shape or form.

Stephen Hawking says you're wrong.

The problem with time travel is that there is no analytical method to say what would happen, since we have absolutely no clue how or if time travel would work in any way shape or form.

Stephen Hawking says you're wrong.

There is a difference between science fiction and science fantasy. Time travel belongs in the realm of science fantasy.

Sorry, I don't quite understand where you're coming from there. Why is it fantasy, because it's impossible? So is interstellar travel.

You didn't need to wait until after his death. There are plenty of people out there who knew this, ex-employees and partners all have spoken up..

Yeah, but we obviously had to wait till after his death for these stories to appear: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2231063/Steve-Jobs-Strangers-swap-stories-running-Apple-genius-town.html http://forbesindia.com/article/recliner/untold-stories-about-steve-jobs/34039/2

Federal Prosecutor Oritz said Aaron's suicide won't change how she handles cases:
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/01/ortiz_says_suicide_will_not_change_handling_cases

And Assistant United States Attorney Stephen Heymann 'drove another hacker Jonathan James to suicide in 2008 after he named him in a cyber crime case':
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2262831/Revealed-Aaron-Swartz-prosecutor-drove-hacker-suicide-2008-named-cyber-crime-case.html

Here are some other grubby cases Oritz has been involved in: http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/01/17/carmen-ortizs-sordid-rap-sheet/

Ortiz’s husband attacked the Swartz family on Twitter: "Truly incredible that in their own son's obit they blame others for his death and make no mention of the 6-month offer ... 6 months is not 35 years or lifetime" What an asshole.
http://www.boston.com/business/innovation/blogs/inside-the-hive/2013/01/15/attorney-carmen-ortiz-husband-attacks-swartz-family-twitter/vzxbY5lrrG7BvGjQGnNDtJ/blog.html
http://twitchy.com/2013/01/15/husband-of-mass-attorney-general-deletes-twitter-account-after-defending-prosecution-of-aaron-swartz/

There are "We the people" petitions to remove both Orirz and Heryman, but don't hold your breath. She is an Obama appointee and Heymann's father is a Clinton staffer. How about Someone in the press corps ask Obama what he thinks of his appointees killing off bright young kids?
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/remove-united-states-district-attorney-carmen-ortiz-office-overreach-case-aaron-swartz/RQNrG1Ck
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/fire-assistant-us-attorney-steve-heymann/RJKSY2nb?utm_source=wh.gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl

Civil liberties attorney Harvey Silverglate said of Aaron: "He was being made into a highly visible lesson, He was enhancing the careers of a group of career prosecutors and a very ambitious — politically-ambitious — U.S. attorney who loves to have her name in lights.” http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57564212-38/prosecutor-in-aaron-swartz-hacking-case-comes-under-fire/

The problem is Federal Prosecutors pick a career-building target and then shop for a crime. Big Criminals are too much work, but small fry like Aaron don't have the resources to fight back so all they have to do is bully them into taking a plea bargain and then bask in the glory. It's been going on for a long time and many people have been swallowed up, but the media usually never reports it:
http://books.google.com/books?id=Tu5RB6YHf10C&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&ots=51Ya4U8XFt&dq=lynch+in+the+name+of+justice (Go to page 43 of this Google Books preview).

They follow the example of Muhammad impeccably, kidnapping and raping non-Muslim girls, terrorising non-Muslim countries, and even who oppose laws used to suppress non-Muslims.

Really? I think these fuckheads didn't get the memo.

The violent crime rate in the UK is twice what it is in the US, and generally that is attributed to the lower incarceration rate:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-25671/Violent-crime-worse-Britain-US.html

Is that a good tradeoff? I don't think so.

> During another investigation in the 1990s, Heymann wanted Harvard to place a electronic banner on its intranet telling users they were being monitored, as Network World reported. He said would allow the feds to monitor the network without getting a court order. Harvard disagreed, saying it respected the privacy of its users. According to his Harvard biography, Heymann is responsible for supervising approximately 80 criminal prosecutors and reviewing the majority of approximately 400 indictments returned and informations filed annually.

Anyone trust this nutbag with your liberties? He has done it before too: Aaron Swartz prosecutor 'drove another hacker to suicide in 2008 after he named him in a cyber crime case. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2262831/Revealed-Aaron-Swartz-prosecutor-drove-hacker-suicide-2008-named-cyber-crime-case.html#ixzz2IhxDiQLD

What better word would you use for cases where people follow rather than thinking for themselves, like a sheep circle or an ant mill?

On Slashdot, no less.

BOOSH is teh EVILLL! (I'll take my +5 mod now, thank you!)

Then you have an inability to read
Australia Violent crime rose when guns became more controled (note snopes does not debunk this and doesn't even address it so stop citing it as a response) http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847/
England gun crime rose 35% as of 2003 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-154307/Gun-crime-soars-35.html/
and had doubled as of 2012 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466.html/

What better word would you use for cases where people follow rather than thinking for themselves, like a sheep circle or an ant mill?

Uh people die anyway. Japan has one of the highest suicide rates in the world and virtually no guns there. Does it really matter if they die from guns or a knife. Also in Canada, you have a higher violent crime rate than the US. I have to say, i hate arguing with Canadians or British people. You claim banning guns is OK yet you have a higher violent crime rate than us,about twice as high actually, and the UK higher than South Africa. Congratulations on being so ignorant. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html Im sure you can find other sources for the data as well.

Not a wave.. that would certainly take more than a week. There have been break-ins where the thieves when there prepared to deal with the gun safes they were targeting..
first link from google results

Don't you follow the news? Apparently not having a Facebook account it's a sign you are a psychopath!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2184658/Is-joining-Facebook-sign-youre-psychopath-Some-employers-psychologists-say-suspicious.html

of emulating the sony design process or German designers from the 50s

NOAA in 2008 wrote than any observed period of statistically insignificant warming greater than 15 years was excluded by their models at the 95% confidence level.

We've seen 16 of those years now. By NOAA's own words, their model only has a 5% chance of being right anymore.

And of course, Trenberth - "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't"

In fact, the Met Office just downgraded their decadal prediction - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2261577/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-Met-Office-report-reveals-MoS-got-right-warming--deniers-now.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Of course, saying that the observation of a lack of statistically significant warming over the past 16 years is very close to the "average consensus forecasts" is like saying that your personality is very close to the "average consensus horoscopes" of the last 16 years - there's no falsifiability there.

Come back and play the science game when you get some :)

I've read that he was offered a six month sentence in a plea bargain. Rather than take that offer (which would have given him maybe four to five months in a minimum security facility

Here is a case that expresses the duality of the situation: the judge went far above the prosecutors' recommendations. So. Once you plead guilty to 17 felonies the prosecutor's promise is no guarantee - but there will of course be no appeal. And the sentence in that case, 25 years, was for a myriad of offenses: robbery, attempted murder, kidnapping and so on was less that Ortiz prosecutor proposed for Aaron if he was put to the work of actually trying the case.

Six months offer for 17 felonies would just stoke the fires of outrage. 12 days each? So there was not ever an actual federal case in the lot? This, if true, would be an admission that they were oppressing him without due cause. Of course, there would be no record of it anyway and if were weren't actually involved in the case - say, the US Attorney's husband, we would have no way to know. Him I don't believe.

Not that it matters at all. As another one of Mrs. Ortiz's victims discovered, once they have you in the system they never let you go.

You apologists for this horrifically broken system need to get a grip. This is outrageous.

But it Does Not Happen. There are no stories from the UK or France or Germany or Sweden of crazed killers who've cooked up some clever death dealing machine in their kitchen and then wreaked mayhem on the streets, are there? Mass killings in these countries are dramatically rarer than in the US, and still involve guns for the most part.

*ahem*
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2148355/Convicted-felon-Randy-Smith-turns-Super-Soaker-water-pistol-deadly-shotgun.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165531/Its-wild-wild-West-Midlands-Homemade-gun-Uzis-Ak47s-make-huge-haul-firearms-seized-police-just-year.html

There was also the case of a UK fellow arrested a few years back for merely posting how to machine your own firearms.

But it Does Not Happen. There are no stories from the UK or France or Germany or Sweden of crazed killers who've cooked up some clever death dealing machine in their kitchen and then wreaked mayhem on the streets, are there? Mass killings in these countries are dramatically rarer than in the US, and still involve guns for the most part.

*ahem*
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2148355/Convicted-felon-Randy-Smith-turns-Super-Soaker-water-pistol-deadly-shotgun.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165531/Its-wild-wild-West-Midlands-Homemade-gun-Uzis-Ak47s-make-huge-haul-firearms-seized-police-just-year.html

There was also the case of a UK fellow arrested a few years back for merely posting how to machine your own firearms.

FFS enough with the nuclear-accidents-are-cool-and-safe propaganda on slashdot.

On the one hand we are expected to believe there are nuclear terrorists with a few grams of cesium-137 pose a deadly threat to our largest cities

On the other hand we are expected to believe a nuclear accident where 180TONS of nuclear fuel in three reactors completely melted down, releasing over 5-30kg (15-85TBq) of cesium-137 directly into the atmosphere, 10 times as much other volatile isotopes, (in addition to even greater ongoing releases into the ocean) will have no significant health effects at a population level.

Read the works of the late Alice Stewart at Oxford University or Ernest Sternglass. All the other pro-nuclear academics are corrupted gits.