Funny thing then that it's years later and the yellow jackets never returned.
Interestingly, it seems that fear causes us to give off a scent that infuriates bees and wasps. If you are personally sensitive, it's understandable, but of not, try to overcome your fear and you'll find that they ignore you.
There are better ways. When I had some yellow jackets move in, I blasted their nesting area with cinnamon powder. Apparently, they like the smell about as much as humans like a garbage dump.
As for termites, yeah, sometimes you have to resort to poison. It's about a measured response, not no response.
OP wasn't suggesting not killing them, just finding a nicer effective way to do it. For example, pour liquid nitrogen down the hole instead. Similar all around except that excess N2 causes an easy death starting with a dreamlike state rather than a sensation of suffocating and burning like CO2 does.
Once the stream is tagged, it stays tagged, both directions. It doesn't even need to run through the deep inspection anymore, just a quick policy routing decision based on matching a mask (A fast XOR based op). That's a GREAT way to speed it up to the max the network can actually handle (as opposed to what the customer normally gets. You don't seem to know very much about how that sort of gear works (or why). Perhaps if you did, it would be as obvious to you as it is to many others why they are doing this.
But you have no evidence of that. None.
You mean other than the kid in TFA proving that streams that appear to be associated with a speedtest are passed through without even a check that the account is allowed to use internet services. Now, keep in mind that in a civil suit the standard is preponderance of the evidence, not beyond reasonable doubt.
As for your claim that they HAVE to do that to allow a speedtest (which, oddly enough, suggests that you implicitly accept that there is some sort of special routing going on), just how would that be useful as a try before you buy? How would I go about getting my phone on their network without having some sort of account there?
It's very simple. Your stateful firewall sees the/speedtest in the URL and tags the stream. Then it bypasses the throttling and presumably checking for a paid account.
That is, they DO know what the URL was (or enough of it to meet their heuristic determination that it's a speed test).
In other words, a non-network neutral handling of the data based on a good guess that it's a speed test.
Youtube is an example of where the consequences are larger, including possible loss of an account if you get slandered too often, but you can face the same issues with other hosting providers.
Agreed, it should be handled by modifying the DMCA, but since the *AA have apparently kept up their payments, slander laws may be the best available defense for now.
Paramount has recklessly called the publisher of the Ubuntu ISO a copyright violator. Perhaps few here see that as much of a slander, but it is derogatory.
You would have to prove it was knowingly falsely submitted, not just erroneously or even mistakenly.
Not necessarily, negligence is a recognized legal concept. So is the idea of repeat offenses. Make the first one a slap on the wrist and escalating rapidly.
Actually, it is. you can choose to misread what I said if you like, but that's not a discussion, it's a silly pissing contest. US as in our side, as in "the good guys".
If you need to piss, find a toilet or some bushes.
If the question is that when the rules/conditions are changed, how do you push back? You're only option is to vote with your feet which may not be as bad as it first seems. Say a company like Uber suddenly triples their take from their "employees" because their marketing efforts in somewhere, let's say China, aren't going well and they're sinking a mountain of cash into it. The employees stop taking assignments from the app in response, essentially quitting - now the company, in real time, is getting a response that they've gone too far and now cannot provide the same level of service, upping complaints in the region causing them to back off the problem change, probably have to offer inducements to get the (productive) employees back and update their algorithm for making changes to eliminate this problem in the future.
That works if you're working for extras, but fails miserably if you're working for food, clothing, and shelter. Sure, your clothes probably won't wear out before there's a correction, but your stomach and the bills won't wait that long.
Meanwhile, what happens when the algorithm settles into the ideal for the company and likewise for the other employers in the area and in that state you cannot make ends meet? The problem is that whatever the algorithm, it is hard coded to favor the company and probably only looks at the short term.
Actually, the FDA doesn't regulate everything that is ingested. For example, it doesn't regulate the atmosphere or tap water. It doesn't regulate fog machines. It doesn't regulate most of the industrial cheminals that might be inhaled or ingested incidental to occupation.
You asked me if I know what is in the e-juice *I* am using. I said it doesn't include ethylene glycol. There are some cheap chinese juices that do, but those aren't produced under FDA regulation anyway. Interestingly, with the FDA all but shutting down U.S. production, many people will turn to smuggling in those contaminated Chinese juices. The exposure to ethylene glycol will actually increase.
SO you admit that the FDA didn't ban everything but you're still outraged.
I have said so from the beginning. They have grandfathered a number of old, less effective, and in some cases actually dangerous devices (which are not currently marketed, but may make a comeback now) while blocking the newer more effective and safer devices. And yes, I am outraged much as you would be if cars newer than the model T were banned for "safety" reasons.
How about we chop the FDA up for firewood and form a new agency with a sense of proportion that will more appropriately regulate. Everything they need to know is already out there in industry and community literature as well as university research. All PVs in a given class operate on the same principles. The poorly designed ones that offer particular dangers are generally weeded out through community reputation. The CPSC is more capable of making those determinations than the FDA in any event since the dangers relate to battery shorts and such. It's plain silly to treat each model like a special snowflake.
There's no good reason not to regulate as they do foodstuffs. That is spot checks for harmful deviation or contamination.
Finally, so far the industry has done a better job with safety than the FDA typically does. For an example, you may remember the discovery of popcorn lung. As soon as the reports came out, juice vendors acted quickly to get diacetyl out of their products even though the levels in existing products were already below the threshold of harm discovered in the new research. By the time the FDA announced that it would "look in to" the problem, ejuice vendors had removed it. Two years later, the FDA took action. It looks like ecig users are better off with industry/community regulation.
The FDA hasn't even yet figured out that the addictive quality of cigarettes is driven as much (or more) by the MAOIs in the smoke as the nicotine itself. The vaping community and industry researchers have done that.
Slashdot Mirror
The ground isn't hundreds of degrees below zero, even in Chicago.
Funny thing then that it's years later and the yellow jackets never returned.
Interestingly, it seems that fear causes us to give off a scent that infuriates bees and wasps. If you are personally sensitive, it's understandable, but of not, try to overcome your fear and you'll find that they ignore you.
If it comes from just boiled N2, it will sink.
There are better ways. When I had some yellow jackets move in, I blasted their nesting area with cinnamon powder. Apparently, they like the smell about as much as humans like a garbage dump.
As for termites, yeah, sometimes you have to resort to poison. It's about a measured response, not no response.
OP wasn't suggesting not killing them, just finding a nicer effective way to do it. For example, pour liquid nitrogen down the hole instead. Similar all around except that excess N2 causes an easy death starting with a dreamlike state rather than a sensation of suffocating and burning like CO2 does.
She would have to watch several at the same time to manage it within that time period.
[citation needed]
Once the stream is tagged, it stays tagged, both directions. It doesn't even need to run through the deep inspection anymore, just a quick policy routing decision based on matching a mask (A fast XOR based op). That's a GREAT way to speed it up to the max the network can actually handle (as opposed to what the customer normally gets. You don't seem to know very much about how that sort of gear works (or why). Perhaps if you did, it would be as obvious to you as it is to many others why they are doing this.
But you have no evidence of that. None.
You mean other than the kid in TFA proving that streams that appear to be associated with a speedtest are passed through without even a check that the account is allowed to use internet services. Now, keep in mind that in a civil suit the standard is preponderance of the evidence, not beyond reasonable doubt.
As for your claim that they HAVE to do that to allow a speedtest (which, oddly enough, suggests that you implicitly accept that there is some sort of special routing going on), just how would that be useful as a try before you buy? How would I go about getting my phone on their network without having some sort of account there?
It's very simple. Your stateful firewall sees the /speedtest in the URL and tags the stream. Then it bypasses the throttling and presumably checking for a paid account.
That is, they DO know what the URL was (or enough of it to meet their heuristic determination that it's a speed test).
In other words, a non-network neutral handling of the data based on a good guess that it's a speed test.
Sure, but do they really want to make their cheating a matter of public record and so hand a class action lawyer a win on a gold platter?
You have to show some loss. In this case, it would be hard to do, but for any youtuber who has monetized their video, it's trivially easy to show.
There is research now that suggests that dietary intake of saturated fat doesn't have much effect on blood levels.
If it continues to happen, it does indicate negligence since that would show that you continued using a known flawed process.
In cases where too many strikes can get a person banned, it could even be considered tortious interference.
I don't see why sprinkling slanderous claims in with legit ones changes much (read the alt text). There was still a negligently included false claim.
And so, the need to change the law.
It wasn't Ubuntu that was slandered.
Youtube is an example of where the consequences are larger, including possible loss of an account if you get slandered too often, but you can face the same issues with other hosting providers.
Agreed, it should be handled by modifying the DMCA, but since the *AA have apparently kept up their payments, slander laws may be the best available defense for now.
Paramount has recklessly called the publisher of the Ubuntu ISO a copyright violator. Perhaps few here see that as much of a slander, but it is derogatory.
This was clearly a decepticon action.
You would have to prove it was knowingly falsely submitted, not just erroneously or even mistakenly.
Not necessarily, negligence is a recognized legal concept. So is the idea of repeat offenses. Make the first one a slap on the wrist and escalating rapidly.
Actually, it is. you can choose to misread what I said if you like, but that's not a discussion, it's a silly pissing contest. US as in our side, as in "the good guys".
If you need to piss, find a toilet or some bushes.
Why so complicated? The problem is automated remote access. Just use ssh and a unique password set at the factory and printed on a sticker.
Bonus points for avoiding lockout, a jumper inside the unit allows password-less access.
Alternatively, a user accessible button. Pressing it opens a 5 minute window for login. Otherwise, no access.
If the question is that when the rules/conditions are changed, how do you push back? You're only option is to vote with your feet which may not be as bad as it first seems. Say a company like Uber suddenly triples their take from their "employees" because their marketing efforts in somewhere, let's say China, aren't going well and they're sinking a mountain of cash into it. The employees stop taking assignments from the app in response, essentially quitting - now the company, in real time, is getting a response that they've gone too far and now cannot provide the same level of service, upping complaints in the region causing them to back off the problem change, probably have to offer inducements to get the (productive) employees back and update their algorithm for making changes to eliminate this problem in the future.
That works if you're working for extras, but fails miserably if you're working for food, clothing, and shelter. Sure, your clothes probably won't wear out before there's a correction, but your stomach and the bills won't wait that long.
Meanwhile, what happens when the algorithm settles into the ideal for the company and likewise for the other employers in the area and in that state you cannot make ends meet? The problem is that whatever the algorithm, it is hard coded to favor the company and probably only looks at the short term.
And now the abused becomes the abuser.
Actually, the FDA doesn't regulate everything that is ingested. For example, it doesn't regulate the atmosphere or tap water. It doesn't regulate fog machines. It doesn't regulate most of the industrial cheminals that might be inhaled or ingested incidental to occupation.
You asked me if I know what is in the e-juice *I* am using. I said it doesn't include ethylene glycol. There are some cheap chinese juices that do, but those aren't produced under FDA regulation anyway. Interestingly, with the FDA all but shutting down U.S. production, many people will turn to smuggling in those contaminated Chinese juices. The exposure to ethylene glycol will actually increase.
SO you admit that the FDA didn't ban everything but you're still outraged.
I have said so from the beginning. They have grandfathered a number of old, less effective, and in some cases actually dangerous devices (which are not currently marketed, but may make a comeback now) while blocking the newer more effective and safer devices. And yes, I am outraged much as you would be if cars newer than the model T were banned for "safety" reasons.
How about we chop the FDA up for firewood and form a new agency with a sense of proportion that will more appropriately regulate. Everything they need to know is already out there in industry and community literature as well as university research. All PVs in a given class operate on the same principles. The poorly designed ones that offer particular dangers are generally weeded out through community reputation. The CPSC is more capable of making those determinations than the FDA in any event since the dangers relate to battery shorts and such. It's plain silly to treat each model like a special snowflake.
There's no good reason not to regulate as they do foodstuffs. That is spot checks for harmful deviation or contamination.
Finally, so far the industry has done a better job with safety than the FDA typically does. For an example, you may remember the discovery of popcorn lung. As soon as the reports came out, juice vendors acted quickly to get diacetyl out of their products even though the levels in existing products were already below the threshold of harm discovered in the new research. By the time the FDA announced that it would "look in to" the problem, ejuice vendors had removed it. Two years later, the FDA took action. It looks like ecig users are better off with industry/community regulation.
The FDA hasn't even yet figured out that the addictive quality of cigarettes is driven as much (or more) by the MAOIs in the smoke as the nicotine itself. The vaping community and industry researchers have done that.
It was the vandals. They spent so much money on sandblasting graffiti the whole thing collapsed.