Slashdot Mirror

https://www.google.com/amp/www... NASA is a horrible entity for security given it's past failures.

Uh, the link you post cites the case of Bo Jiang, who worked for NIA (a contractor that worked for NASA), and who was arrested at Dulles airport on his way to China with a laptop full of information. The papers at the time all said he was accused of "espionage".

Turns out the espionage case against him was withdrawn (link) because he wasn't, as it turned out, carrying any NASA technical information on the computer.

What he was exporting to China on his hard disk was: porn. (Ars Technica article). Turns out, yeah, porn is more valuable in China than mere technical secrets, and is harder to get.

What are you talking about? They have lockers. Use them. For schools that don't have lockers either forbid them to bring the phones or come up with a secure box to store them during the day.

You should learn how many schools are removing lockers these days.

http://pilotonline.com/news/gr...

https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us...
No intent, kept records in house, but with knowledge (which Hillary should have had...she went through the briefs).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Tried to bring attention to a perceived illegal activity, prosecuted anyways.

http://www.politico.com/story/...
Sailor took some photos for posterity of his workplace, he seems to have had no clue it was even an issue until he was charged with holding classified information.

http://pilotonline.com/news/mi...
No intent to distribute.

http://usuncut.com/politics/cl...

Of course, there is no case like Clinton's, even Powel never sent or received classified information. It is however gross negligence, and all of these above were the same.

Ah, if *most* jurisdictions have provisions, that means it's not a problem? For example, feel free to peruse the relevant WA state legal code and point out the relevant provision (spoiler: the ACLU doesn't seem to think it exists). In any case, 18 US code 2251, a law against child porn is a federal law and - while I believe it only covers inter-state or foreign transmission - contains no such provisions. Fortunately, minors are definitely never in a different state from their SOs, and if they somehow were, would never request or send naughty pictures, right? Not that I know of any cases of the feds prosecuting such a case of private communications between consenting teens, but if they did the law would appear to be on their side.

While states certainly have some de facto control over what cases they will prosecute, in many cases they have certainly attempted to convict sexting teens as child pornographers, and sometimes they have succeeded. The situation does seem less outrageous than I believed it to be, especially after the first few cases to make the news generated enough outrage at this travesty, but it's still far from perfect.

http://www.cnet.com/news/polic... - 17 and 16 year old in Florida prosecuted, found guilty, conviction upheld on appeal.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2... - 15 year old arrested on felony charge (apparently got put on no-cell-phone-or-unsupervised-Internet probation, charges probably dropped afterward)
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2... - 7 teens charged with felonies, at least 6 plea bargained to misdemeanors (better than it could have been, still very wrong)
http://laist.com/2013/05/17/re... - Key quote: "... anyone who sends obscene images of persons under the age of 18, whether it’s of themselves or someone else, are violating child pornography laws,” San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Dept.
https://www.washingtonpost.com... - Cops photographing a 17-year-old's junk to try and enter the pictures as evidence. They eventually backed down, after massive public ridicule, on the plan to have him given an injection to make him erect before photographing him *again*.
http://pilotonline.com/news/go... - Provisions, you say? Nope, can't even downgrade it to a misdemeanor, gotta stay a felony!

Sorry for doing the research...

This is just a plan to let President Bush take care of all those PETA wackos. You see, by making oil from turkeys, he'll surely upset any self-righteous PETA member. They'll boycott the new oil and continue to use oil from the middle East, and consequently they'll be supporting terrorism.

PETA is already known to support domestic terrorist groups...there's really no need to work in a Middle East angle when dealing with them.

Then please explain what a recently commisioned aircraft carrier is doing with former President Bush's name.

The answers are in the article ;-)

First of all, it's a prototype. Secondly, it would hardly make sense to install a 200mph train as a university 2/3 mile shuttle.

According to a linked article at the bottom, the backers of this project consider maglevs cheaper and simpler to build and operate than conventional trains.

They believe that there is a market for what they called low-speed maglevs in universities, airports, and other places that require short distance people-moving. The Florida facility is working on increasing the speed.

This seems like sensible engineering; start small and build on one's experience, improving the technology incrementally.

For a more ambitious project, check out the California Maglev Project.

I agree, but my local newspaper (which is based in the same city as the real PETA, BTW) reported a few days ago that this decision was made under the Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. Can anyone explain how this law can be used in a case like this?

The local paper also has an article about this...
Landmark pours $25 million into 'open-source' software venture

that was Pilotonline