Slashdot Mirror
The Future Has a Kill Switch
palegray.net writes "Bruce Schneier brings us his perspective on a future filled with kill switches; from OnStar-equipped automobiles and city buses that can be remotely disabled by police to Microsoft's patent-pending ideas regarding so-called Digital Manners Policies. In Schneier's view, these capabilities aren't exactly high points of our potential future. From the article: 'Once we go down this path — giving one device authority over other devices — the security problems start piling up. Who has the authority to limit functionality of my devices, and how do they get that authority? What prevents them from abusing that power? Do I get the ability to override their limitations? In what circumstances, and how? Can they override my override?' We recently discussed the Pentagon's interest in kill switches for airplanes. At what point does centralizing and/or delegating operational authority over so much of our lives become a dangerous practice of its own?"
"At what point does centralizing and/or delegating operational authority over so much of our lives become a dangerous practice of its own?" ... From that point onwards, the battle between the controllers of the kill switches, and everybody who wants to gain control of them starts. Of course the normal user is left back in the middle.
Already at day 1, as soon as the slippery slope is hit
When I bought a GM vehicle for my wife a couple years ago, the FIRST order of business was to disconnect the antenna to the OnStar box. I don't need big brother being privy to conversations in the car, or tracking my movements. I'm normally not a tin foil fedora kind of guy, but there has already been evidence of police improperly using OnStar to bug vehicles.
I like how this article bring out all the negatives, but never the positives. I can see many useful benefits in having this functionality.
First, if evildoers try to do harm with these devices, it can be stopped before damage is done. Second, one great feature of onstar is the ability to unlock your car if you lock yourself out for some reason. Third, most people like having this override ability.
"Sir, I believe you just dropped 29 planes from the sky instead of hitting the EasyButton for more toner. How do you want me to handle this with the press ?"
As was discussed in the airplane kill switch thread, this gives new difficulties. A terrorist now just has to threaten to block communication from the plane and make it fly in a weird pattern, and then the pentagon will kill the 200+ passengers on board with an F-16 rather than the terrorists.
Regarding the Onstar system, this is known about by their company, and they are being quite responsible IMHO -- the switch has many, many security levels to be activated, and gradually starves the engine of fuel so that one would coast to a stop rather than suddenly switching off. Of course, this is a bigger problem for an airplane.
Slashdotter, ID #101. UIDs are in binary, right?
Awesome, now terrorists won't need to hijack airplanes. All they have to do is hijack the means of controlling the killswitches.
This will kill the future.
DELETE
FROM comments
WHERE poster_name='Anonymous Coward';
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Cops want that today as well.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
And self sufficient individuals!
I would much rather have the engines remotely shut down or idled on a plane in flight, offering at least a chance at an emergency landing, than to have the plane summarily blown out of the sky. Most likely the "kill switch" would be engaged only so long as the craft remains on a threatening course. It would also be useful in preventing unauthorized/uncontrolled take-offs.
Lo-jack seems to have been fairly effective in stopping auto thieves. I don't really see an "After the Sunset" remotely hacked limousine scenario developing in real life.
Invenio via vel creo
This has the effect of turning us all into renters. Which is fine, I don't want the title, I don't want to carry insurance, I don't want to maintain the vehicle and so on. As long as I don't have the rights of ownership, I don't want to pay for ownership. And when it's time to get rid of said asset just bring it back to the dealer and let them deal with it. I am fine with being treated like a criminal under those conditions.
sometimes, I wish my wife had a kill switch. Nag, nag, nag.
http://twitter.com/OLDTELEGRAM
If I own it, I'm allowed to modify it. Kill switches don't do anything if they're not connected anymore.
Heck, like you said, just unplug the damn thing. Or if you are paranoid, get a ball of tin foil and cover up the antenna. I love how people give up their freedoms for "safety". Onstar says we can call the police in the event your air bags are deployed. No kidding, gee, golly wow. You and the 3,452 people that see your wreck are going to whip out their cell phones and call the police. Onstar, just getting people use to the idea that big brother is listening. How long until insurance companies get to peak into onstar?
How about a kill switch to prevent a First Post? Of course, the problem is how to get posts starting from second if there's no first. Always unanticipated problems when one tries to implement those security measures some politicians seem to want so much.
I'd love to see "digital manners" enforcement in theaters, restaurants, buses, etc. If mobile phones are so important that people cannot turn them off, then how did people live thirty years ago? Haven't you seen those old movies, where the detective had to stop at a public phone to send instructions to his associates? Yes, I'd love to see a way to enforce manners in public places.
However, a kill switch is no answer. If people abuse cell phones by using them in obnoxious ways, how long would it take them to abuse the kill switch? History has shown us, and it should be clear by now, that any sort of digital key is subjected to abuse.
Even assuming a perfect implementation, that mythical unbreakable code, there's still social engineering. A criminal could buy an old theatre just to get the phone kill switch installed there, if it were necessary for him to silence a phone. And there's always the risk that terrorists could find ways to crack a plane's kill switch in mid-air. When the plane is approaching JFK, wait until it is headed towards Manhattan and then immobilize the pilot's controls.
Like many medicines of old that have been abandoned because of their side-effects, kill switches are a solution that's much worse than the problem they are trying to solve.
The same sentiment can be applied to new technologies.
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
Once again, Soccer Mommy and her credit-fueled purchasing power wins the day.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
The first time someone launches a mass shutdown order in a metropolitan area during rush hour, will be all it takes to turn the public wildly against this.
As I read stories like this one, I have found myself saying out loud "we are so fucked".
So thats how I will tag these stories from now on "wearesofucked"
Comment removed based on user account deletion
At what point does centralizing and/or delegating operational authority over so much of our lives become a dangerous practice of its own?
When it can kill your conne%?DE
NO CARRIER
I don't necessarily object to having an override in a commercial jet, but if I have my own plane they better not be trying to force me to install some damn device that lets them control it. MY plane, MY property, keep your hands off.
As long as the pilot doesn't nose down, the plane can glide to the ground. That is assuming the controls are still working. The only reason you need the engines is to remain at an altitude or climb. The plane can act as a glider for as long as it has enough forward air speed to produce the lift required.
In any case without legislation making this mandatory the solution is very simple: Use only stuff that is built on open architectures, using only open source SW. Mod anything that limits your freedom.
At what point does centralizing and/or delegating operational authority over so much of our lives become a dangerous practice of its own?"
When they put kill switches in _us_?
Can these be installed in politicians?
I'm telling MIT to get right on this.
There's one "kill switch" they'll have to pry from my cold, dead hands.
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
> At what point does centralizing and/or delegating operational authority over so much of
> our lives become a dangerous practice of its own?
At the very beginning.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Until they put a kill switch on your firearm.
Japanese scientist: Technically, sir, tomatoes are fags. Military scientist: He means fruits.
Why worry about your car while you carry a cellphone? California designed OBD2 car controllers to have antennas and report VIN, speed, overdue maintenance & more. Feds clipped the antenna & mandated OBD2 in 50 states in 1996(?). Tinfoil may work but try these: http://www.megasquirt.info/ http://www.diyefi.org/ http://www.msefi.com/index.php You can also buy commercial replacements for you drivetrain controller. Before you talk about it, remove your cellphone battery.
"Digital Manners Policies" needs to have a 911 law that forces a override just like how you can dial even if you don't have a sim card in the phone.
JC Denton: "Take your best shot flatlander woman."
..."
Anna Navarre: "How did you know...?"
*explosion*
JC Denton: "I know your UNATCO killphrase: laputan machine."
Gunther Hermann: "I - am not- a machi-
JC Denton: Sticks-and-stones
*explosion*
If you can talk brilliantly enough about a problem, it can create the consoling illusion that it has been mastered.
This is the one kill switch that I want to retain -- the ability to vote out politicians who think that they are our masters rather than our servants.
Three killswitches for the airplanes under the sky,
Seven for the iPhones in the lesser phones,
Nine for OnStar drivers doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of California where the Shadows lie.
One Killswitch to rule them all, One Killswitch to find them,
One Killswitch to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
Who has the authority to limit functionality of my devices, and how do they get that authority?
The laws will be written in a way that appears to limit their application, but the reality will be that loopholes will be woven into the rules, or that people like the CIA just plain don't care about laws and will do whatever they please. There will be no accountability. If someone does get their balls in a vice someone higher up will swoop in and "grant them immunity". (where have we heard that recently?)
What prevents them from abusing that power?
Given the above legal scene, nothing. That which can be abused, will be abused. We've been down that road so many times my shoes wore out. We're always promised that it's ok to make the laws a little overly broad just to "make sure we get them all", and then as a result the laws are always abused. It's not can be, it's not might be, it's will be. "Can be abused" always ends up "was abused". Unless you write the law without the wiggle room, it will be abused, guaranteed. End of story.
History tends to show that loopholes that crop up in new laws were introduced by those who made the law, for those that made the law. Things like congress passing telemarketing rules, that they are conveniently exempt from. (where was the justification? they didn't even bother trying to justify it) People that are already in a position of power just assume the laws don't (or shouldn't) apply to them. Nixon was a hilarious example. He was totally convinced it was OK for the president to ignore the laws. He just didn't get around to making himself legally exempt from them in time. Modern equivalents exist, they just learned from his experience and make sure they have an "out" and then proceed in the same manner.
Do I get the ability to override their limitations? In what circumstances, and how?
Just like CSS, you can override their limits, but then they'll make it illegal to do so.
Can they override my override?
No (what they tell you) Yes. (the actual practice)
We recently discussed the Pentagon's interest in kill switches for airplanes. At what point does centralizing and/or delegating operational authority over so much of our lives become a dangerous practice of its own?
Take a look where we are now. Wouldn't you say we passed that point looong ago?
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Mod parent up.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Sounds like maybe Socialism is indistinguishable from Capitalism for an sufficiently non-capitalized individual.
When you have an unaccountable central government with nearly omnipotent control over those under their authority, what you have can't be described with only the words 'socialism' or 'capitalism'. What you have in such a case is authoritarianism. It's authoritarian governments that we need to worry about - not necessarily socialist or capitalist ones. Authoritarian socialism (communism) has proven to be every bit as dangerous to its citizens as authoritarian capitalism (fascism). People need to be less concerned with the socialism/capitalism axis and more concerned with the libertarian/authoritarian axis because that's the one that really counts if you're worried about monster police states.
Program was suspended in early June in Dallas after the bait (I'll call it entrapment) car struck someone before they disabled the car. Months earlier, I watched a youtube vid of a "successful" bait car incident. They let this guy steal the car and drive away, then started chasing him. It turns out the whole time they could have remotely locked the doors and killed the engine. But they had their fun chasing this guy around for a while, and even shooting at him, before disabling the vehicle. When I saw that earlier video, I knew someone would get hurt eventually. That's definitely abuse: they could have disabled the car and locked the guy in for apprehension before he even left the parking lot. Worst outcome? Maybe a little fender bender. Instead, they had all sorts of fun with high speed chases, shooting at the guy, etc. before they bothered to use it. And some old lady got killed because the cops needed their fun with a rigged high-speed chase. Disgusting.
All pass beyond reach of medicine. None pass beyond the reach of love.
The NRA has the power to stop that.
I just had an argument^^^^^^^^discussion with a lawyer about this. Apparently the legal position is that the legal system is perfect and so we don't have anything to worry about. Unless, of course, we are not lawyers.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
I am fine with being treated like a criminal under those conditions.
I'm not.
If I about to pay the full price for something and then not own it - FUCK THAT!
If I'm about to become the owner of nothing and still end up paying for stuff - I'd rather have communism.
At least that way we will all be able to afford the same car, clothes, food and etc.
And when we don't - it will be appointed to us by the government when it decides that we need it.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
First of all, it would be
DELETE * FROM comments WHERE poster_name="Anonymous Coward";
Even then there's a logical flaw. Anons don't have usernames, so if you ran that query, no anon posts would be deleted, and if there happened to be anyone with the username Anonymous Coward (And IIRC there is) they'd be very upset with you. Maybe something more along the lines of:
DELETE * FROM comments WHERE anonymous=1;
Even then there's an slight chance that there could be one or more worthwhile posts done in AC mode, so wiping them wouldn't be a good thing to do. Plus Slashdot comments are never deleted, and therefore the page was probably never designed to handle a comment being deleted (post nesting system etc.), so deleting a comment would probably throw the discussion page for a loop.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Brilliant hacker starts playing with ways of taking over consumer electronics remotely, hacker sees some hoodlum attacking a defenseless person, hacker sets the attackers ipod to yani at 140db, shenanigans ensue and before you know it you have the feds trying to take down a "terrorist" because they're a threat to their ability to control the people.
I have never understood the angst about movie theaters. The solution seems obvious to me. The theater should have a device that makes every phone in the room ring. You put up the notice on the screen that says "please silence your cell phone" and then say "3 ... 2 ... 1 ... " and make all the phones ring. It embarrasses the people who forgot to silence their phone, and an usher can kick non-compliant people out before the movie ever starts. Yes there is a way to get around the system (turn your phone back on whe the movie starts) but there will always be a way to hack the system.
MacDonalds shouldn't be able to ring my phone when I walk past them on the street, but I don't have a problem with a movie theater. I have already voluntarily consented to having them play loud music and sound into my ear. I am carrying a device that I have already consented to allow ANYONE to make ring, as long as they know my number.
My main concern is that the device shouldn't tell the movie theater who I am or what my cell phone number is. And, the device should be required to have a valid registered caller ID, so if someone does it to me when I didn't consent, it is trivial for me to call the cops and report them.
Where you just pulled the fuses on the traction control, "door bongs," disabled the rev limiter and top speed limiter, and maybe the ABS and EBD if you like it rough. Nowadays you have all these newfangled tracking (OnStar, insurace rate-adjusting OBDII plugins) and advanced nannying systems (Nissan R35 GTR).
Ah, to get back to the good ol' days...
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
kill'em switches
I had about some 3 or 4 CD players diying on my very own hands.
My only supposition is that I played CDs which were recorded in Japan by my wife relatives and sent here (Brazil) with children songs (played live at parties, not commercial recordings).
The same CD always played ok in my computer *and* in my DVD player.
So, in my view, not only kill switched but even automatically at that.
For this reason we should set up an international list of brands which have DRM and do such things. This would prevent deviant governments from f*ing with people's rights in the name of greedy corporations (heck, do these guys know what "for a song" means?).
We should also support with our money independent authors. This way we send a clear message to recording companies and, even better, authors and singers get a larger slice after we dump the men in the middle...
And if you run Windows and it blows chunks (BSOD) and something goes wrong, or the controls GPF, what prevents the system from disabling a plane full of people for no reason? What protects you from the mistakes that are inherent in a faulty operating system?
Linux, while more stable, can still cause some of these issues...like, what happens if the configuration isn't right?
How about redundancy? Do we keep these controls monitored and operated from different locations? Just in case one goes down, or is sabotaged?
There should be legislation such that these "features" are ALWAYS optional, and can be turned off by the consumer.
As long as that is so, then individual consumers can give up control over their own lives on a purely voluntary basis. If they want to, then let them. Apparently some of them want to. Go figure.
As technology improves, the ability of governments to spy on and control their populations similarly improves. Reading everyone's mail once wasn't practice, but as soon as it was practice (when email came along) they quickly moved in that direction. This trend poses an extreme long term danger for democracy and it's made all the more extreme due to its slow creeping nature. The governments of today that are authorising mass surveillance etc., are laying the foundations for future tyranny.
You can bet your bottom dollar that as the kill switch idea penetrates further and further into society, bean-counters will ensure that a lot of people who decide when to use one will be about the same pay grade as airport screeners. That is, minimum wage drones who are bored beyond endurance by their job. So we'll all have to put up with being late for appointments and getting cop-shop phone calls from teenage kids who found some stupid but harmless way to get a bunch of cars stopped in the middle of a major intersection, while genuine security threats skate around the system with impunity.
So once again, our quality of life will be compromised, our freedom will be diminished and the net effect on security will be, at best, zero.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
It's called a pair of pliers, which I will use to rip out any of that crap out of any vehicle I own, and hope everyone else will eventually evolve enough to have the balls to do the same thing. I've hated OnStar from the start, could see the implications immediately, and have NOT been quiet about it, telling whoever may have the ears to hear. If anyone is insane enough to be buying a car in this particular time in history, they should be explicit in that NO ONSTAR or any such technology be included, and that the buyer not be made responsible for the cost of that in any way. Revolution, people. It's what is needed now, and has been for quite some time. Lock and load, and LET'S GO!
Wouldn't this be fun in war, enemy invades, gets control of the kill switches, and immobilizes almost everyone.
Bruce Schneier can killswitch the future!
Frank Herbert's Harkonnen's installed "Heart Plugs" into their citizens and prisoners, etc... as a form of 'kill switch'...
If that is not the latter part of the "Kill Switch" 'Slippery Slope', I suppose making it remote-controlled might be...
Not the specific example I was looking for, but you get the idea: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3K-jRXij-w
The 'heart plug' concept, however, has now been successfully applied for other purposes: http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/anti+theft-coffee-cup-stops-that-klepto-cube+mate-244147.php
At what point does centralizing and/or delegating operational authority over so much of our lives become a dangerous practice of its own?
At the point when people of questionable character are attracted to power so much that they might engage in questionable behavior to grab it.
Seastead this.
i hardly think having mobiles off in hospitals is a good idea.
he who controls the spice controls the universe
I know that travel and landing is auto-piloted. I dunno for take off, but I don't think it could not be done. And frankly, I trust far more an autopilot than a real one, in a "normal" situation as a machine is more able to get it right all the time without potential of error. Now if there is an emergency/abnormal landing then I would trust the pilot more.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Liquid Ocelot: "The system is mine!!!!!!"
"Behold! The guns of the patriots!"
Aside from the more mundane abuses by police and government that will (not may, but will) happen, there is of course the obvious (to anyone with a brain, at least) and immediate threat of enemies of this country (of which we have many; thanks so much for that, Bush!) and that of bad hackers (as opposed to good hackers) and organized crime. Where is your OnStar now, that carjackers can just push a button on a keyboard and disable your car, walk right up to it, put a bullet in your brain, and drive off with your car without so much as a scratch on it? Where is your "privacy" when someone who knows how to hack the network can listen in on your most intimate conversations inside your car and post them to the internet for their own amusement -- or perhaps use them to blackmail you? Or better yet, have the Black Bag squad show up at your house in the middle of the night because your political views don't suit the current regime? Do you really want to have your exact position, within a few meters, tracked by the government? For the moment anyways, the Telcos have immunity from prosecution for what would (should!) otherwise be the crime of wiretapping without a court order; ALL THESE THINGS ARE NOW POSSIBLE. If you don't have a problem with all the above, then you're either not paying attention, or you're a mental deficient who is incapable of understanding the threat, or worse than that, you just don't care (which amounts to the same thing). If you're willing to accept all this as "OK", then I guess you won't have a problem with it when they decide to put CCTV cameras in your house so they can watch you having sex (to make sure you're not doing anything "illegal", meaning anything that's not missionary position) and watch you taking a dump (so you don't waste paper or water, of course).
Again, I say: This crap has to be nipped in the bud right now, before it gets any further!
NANOMACHINES BAD! :)
Unless you are a replicant, you have nothing to fear.
OnStar will soon include the ability for the police to shut off your engine remotely.
imagine bad guys getting a hold of this technology. incidents of robbery, kidnapings, murder, rape will sky rocket. best of luck trying to sell a car with this "feature."
It would be so much easier to hack into a car directly and shut it down when assholes follow too close--the old way is just too inefficient: http://xkcd.com/440/
I just stopped a consulting job at a well known software company in Redmond, WA
Was it Nintendo of America, or the other one?
"At what point does centralizing and/or delegating operational authority over so much of our lives become a dangerous practice of its own?"
About seventy years ago.
Only a few years ago, I'd get laughed at for suggesting that Microsoft would eventually have a "dead man's switch" built into Windows to use as a last resort against imminent threats to their bottom line. Nothing says "back off" like taking a few hundred million "hostages" at the push of a button...
8==8 Bones 8==8
Anyone remember this one by Harlan Ellison? The general idea is that everyone has a literal kill-switch installed in their body. Waste too much time, and the government takes it off the end of your life. I think Ellison was probably going for a scare distopia. and I think he was more talking in metaphors rather than warning us against a future rife with kill-switches. Still, kill switches as a concept is something we should develop a civil rights position on. It is, after all, just another form of enforced socialism. These things usually work out if we see them coming ahead of time. - TP
"At what point does centralizing and/or delegating operational authority over [...] our lives become a dangerous practice of its own?" At the point where you choose not to be self responsible, and instead to allow yourself to be governed by another, any other, any time, any where, under any circumstance. All of man's governments and insurance are attempts to avoid being self responsible, to escape inevitable karma. There has never, and never will be, such a system which is not abusive by nature, because it's about trying to get others to be responsible for your karma, which inevitably must come back to you... in one lifetime or another.
All Rights Reserve Without Prejudice, Angela Kahealani. All information + transactions nonnegotiable + private.
And where does one put these kill switches? The Pentagon?
At what point does centralizing and/or delegating operational authority over so much of our lives become a dangerous practice of its own?
I was surprised at the first comment as it was so close to what I thought but very different. The fact that such technology is already in place and this is being decided means there already exists far too much control over our lives. It will be a constant battle between those who wish to control and those who wish for freedom. However - ignorance is a powerful tool and the general population generally won't make a fuss unless a big incident goes public. I'm with the I'm going to disconnect the onstar antenna mentality. I would probably create some circuit that would disable the antenna when the car is in drive to maintain my control but also allow me to call up and get my doors unlocked when I lock myself out.
Which, for some fucking reason they DIDN'T use during the September 11 attacks. Funny that.
Way back in the day, we didn't worry too much about wire tapping because it required a warrant signed by a judge followed by installing physical hardware.
We didn't worry when the capability was built right in to the phone switches because it still required a judge to OK it.
Then they created a "special" secret court ready to sign warrants 24/7.
Then Bush and the FBI decided that was just too much trouble (perhaps they were afraid the judge's rubber stamp would wear out?), so they just started tapping whoever they wanted whenever they wanted. They SAY it was just "the terrorists" and people talking to them, but conveniently, the records that might confirm or deny that are secrets for national security reasons.
Gee, I wonder why people might be a bet skeptical here...
I probably could have worded that differently. My main thesis was not that it should always be optional, but rather that it should never be mandatory.
See the book Androids Dream for how top-down absolute control via devices can go awfully wrong; in summary: a sheep becomes absolute master for all devices (ships, guns, computers, etc) of an alien race.
I don't think thse were Frank Herbert's Harkonnen...
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
nobody really gives a fuck about you. seriously. it's more useful than not. you pink motherfuckers.
it's called a power outage... and have no money
why would anyone wnts to... NO CARRIER. *juuuuuuuuuuuu~*
After all, it isn't devices that kill people ... it's *people* (potential terrorists and content copiers, all of them) that kill people.
Equip 'em all with heartplugs, I say. Remote-controlled.
Kill Switch... Click /obscure?
Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
It seems to me OnStar has been lucky so far. Most members of groups like Anonymous or even individual hacker types don't have a $50,000 truck/car sitting in the garage. At the point it becomes "fun" to play with OnStar I suspect General Motors is going to be in a lot of trouble. Unless, of course, General Motors has accomplished what no one in history has, they built a completely bullet proof device with no back doors that is 100% secure.
I wonder if this kill switch is the tipping point that gets hackers attention? Like the Cruise video was with Anonymous. I've seen some but not a lot of hacking OnStar on the INet. Could this kill switch be when hackers decide it's time to figure out how to get OnStar to answer it's phone? What is the signal protocol? Etc... This is the prerequisite to some 14 year shutting down Chicago. Maybe this will be it.
-[d]-
I love this line:
there really are people out there ... that feel safer with minimum wage employees bossing them around, confiscating their water, and smugly apprehending their deodorant.
How true! I recently went to my local Court to get a business permit, and was greeted with an absurd level of security that included the following exchange:
Guard: Sir, please remove your belt
Me: My BELT?
Guard: Yes, your belt.
Me:
Me: You want me to remove my BELT?
Guard: Yes, sir.
Me: Ok (removes belt, passes it around the metal detector to Guard)
Guard: (Speaking brightly) See? This way you don't set off any alarms!
Me: (Oy....)
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
The Triumphant Universal Win Mom Joke, IMHO was:
"Yo mamma so fat, she fell in love, and broke it."
This mom joke reaches an intersection of abstract and banal with which few other bits of humor can compete, and none exceed.
Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.
It's been 59 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator.
Just noting....
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
oh shit, there goes the planet.
Especially if some clown goes around screaming "Format C!!!"
Read the law and learn for crying out loud. What PNutts is doing is a federal offense.
http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/index.htm?job=operations_2&id=cellular
Operations
Blocking & Jamming
The operation of transmitters designed to jam or block wireless communications is a violation of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act"). See 47 U.S.C. Sections 301, 302a, 333. The Act prohibits any person from willfully or maliciously interfering with the radio communications of any station licensed or authorized under the Act or operated by the U.S. government. 47 U.S.C. Section 333. The manufacture, importation, sale or offer for sale, including advertising, of devices designed to block or jam wireless transmissions is prohibited. 47 U.S.C. Section 302a(b). Parties in violation of these provisions may be subject to the penalties set out in 47 U.S.C. Sections 501-510. Fines for a first offense can range as high as $11,000 for each violation or imprisonment for up to one year, and the device used may also be seized and forfeited to the U.S. government.
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
The Harkonnen gave their victims a residual poison. In order to survive the effects of the poison they needed a regular dose of antidote. Withdrawing that antidote caused the victim to die. Although it seems less sinister than the heart plugs shown in the Movie version it has the added nastiness that escaping capture would lead to your death.