As a historian, you might want to stick to history. The Google images for Balad have been incorrect since about 6 months into the war. I've been there several times and planning any kind of attack based on the Google pics would get you no where. There aren't barracks areas; housing is distributed all around the base. SOCOM forces have lots of C-130's, not helicopters.
Balad airbase is a lot bigger than those Google pics make it out to be. Oh and for the record, those helicopters you see on the southeast runway approach are most likely taxiing towards the runway- they wouldn't be parked that far from cover (it's a 200 yard run to that HAS right next to them).
There are entire sections of flightline and taxiways that don't show up on Google. Huge buildings (super-walmart-size) that are newer than the google pics. All of those tents and trailers have been moved several times since these photos.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is that these pics really are ancient history as far as the war is concerned.
That's why we... er... THEY blur out so many harmless and strategically useless locations. It poisons the data pool when looking for actual 'stuff' that might be important.
It's almost insulting that the place I work ISN'T blurred out.
You are correct. I wrote that post before coffee and my mind was thinking about h2o->h2+02->h20 types of engines while I was writing about IC type engines.
Funny what you'll say when you're not entirely awake.
If your diesel fuel is a suspension of extremely fine non-conductive particles, you have bigger problems than efficiency. Those injector heads will not tolerate any kind of particles.
I suspect they misused the word "electrorheological" or else they have a definition that doesn't include particles.
So we have to do extensive scientific testing on every two-bit invention and patent that comes along? I have to do testing before I can claim that the dozens of air intake fans don't help efficiency? That the "just keep the jar full of water and the car will run off of the H and O produced by electrolysis" is a scam?
I always kind of assumed that the reason new and dodgy-sounding inventions came onto the market without scientific testing is because the sellers know damn well that the device would fail any kind of inspection.
Now you could point out that something like the ultrasonic mosquito repellent actually does have an affect. You could test it and find out that if 100,000 people wore them 24/7, we could collectively receive 2% less bites. Maybe statistically significant, but useless to me if 2% less bites still equals more than 100 bites that I DO receive.
So my degree is not chem or physics. I'll tell you what, though- a large part of my job is painting (industrial, aircraft painting). We use electrostatic spray guns all the time, and I have never once seen a gun with the electrical element inside the gun. They are all on the outside, inside the jet stream, and where they are very vulnerable to being broken or killing someone. Powder coating booths (which also rely on e- charge) work on the same principle.
That is why my vote goes to the bullshit camp. I find it hard to believe that they either -discovered a new kind of EM field -can create a field strong enough to polarize hydrocarbons without interfering with the operation of the vehicle or any other electronic device withing 1/4 mile.
>>so I doubt an electrical field has much influence if any at all on such a liquid.
I'm just going to throw this out there- I was under the impression that the so-called "electrical field" was actually heat; i.e., all this device does is heat up the fuel in the supply line to reduce its viscosity. This would work, but I think that physics might have something to say about the potential return of energy that this device produced vs the amount of energy it consumes.
So, I was under the impression the information couldn't be transmitted faster than the speed of light. From what I understand, even the experiments using entangled particles preserve the speed limit.
So it would seem interesting that the bodies outside our observable bubble are transmitting information (they exist, they are moving this way, etc) faster than their light itself would reach us. Gravity, I am told, also moves at the speed of light.
So how can we have this information without the light?
My only conclusion is that the bodies are dark, but then I am left wondering why they are concentrated at such an arbitrary point in the universe.
Most of the cable and associated structures would burn up on re-entry (or in the case of a rupture, they would fly off into a higher, stable orbit). The remainder of the cable below ~90 miles would have the mass of, oh, a large boulder. And that would land in the pacific ocean. So if and impact with the kinetic energy a medium-sized avalanche is an extinction-level event to you, I'm assuming that you are a species of extraordinarily fragile lichen living along a southern slope of the Pyrenees or something.
You would do well to read 'The Wanting Seed' by Anthony Burgess if you haven't yet. The part that is pertinent to your plot is his descriptions of the phases of gov't: Pelphase, Interphase, and Gusphase.
It is a constantly repeating cycle of: -The gov't thinking people are generally good and crimes having minor punishments -The gov't realizes how terrible people really are and steps up the gestapo-style tactics -The gov't realizes how terrible it has been to its citizens and relaxes the laws, which causes chaos
the above tends to support the traditional military medicine model for treating "shell shock" and "battle fatigue" (as PTSD was know for the past century) by exposure, ie. "return to the battlefield as soon as possible"
I thought that what you meant was that the best therapy for a soldier was to get them back into battlefield mode, either by deploying them again or by letting them pretend that they were still in the battlefield at home. I was saying (in a roundabout way, I suppose) that there is a small but critical difference between returning to the battlefield with the same pathology and returning home and working through the pathology by "keeping the battle alive". I guess I'm having a hard time putting it into words... My understanding was that you were making the VR Iraq out to be video game that allowed soldiers to continue their battlefield emotions instead of resolving them, and I was put into this state of mind by the dozens of up-modded comments that said essentially that. I apologize for the misunderstanding, and I apologize for letting my unchecked emotions rule my comment. I just get fed up with armchair soldiers/psychoanalysts who think that playing Call of Duty makes them qualified to tell me how to deal with my memories. I think I just read too much into your comment. Again, I'm sorry. It looks like I need to go to group more often.
-exposure, ie. "return to the battlefield as soon as possible"
When you have PTSD, there is a difference in returning to the actual battlefield and returning home. The coping mechanisms and traits that you learned on the battlefield are almost by definition very well suited to life on the battlefield; e.g., avoiding wide open spaces, keeping your weapon at the ready, sleeping in body armor, keeping your bags packed, hitting the deck pronto if you hear explosions, etc.
Those traits don't always emotionally expose themselves on the battlefield except as a dull fatigue and apathy. And once the soldier returns home, gets over the big homecoming storm of emotions, and tries to settle into a normal routine- that is when the problems begin. The soldier has been changed from a round peg into a triangle peg and is unable to fit his role in life. This part takes from 6 months to a year to manifest itself. It can come as a surprise to the soldier and to the soldier's family/friends, especially since they might notice it before the soldier does.
I won't go into a big discussion of the symptoms of PTSD. But for the remainder of this discussion I'll disclose that I do fit the textbook descriptions of PTSD: I stick to cover, I shop at night when there are fewer people around, I avoid family gatherings, I avoid talking to anyone who knows anything about who I was prior to my deployments, I sleep with three loaded guns under the bed, one next to the door, one in the silverware drawer, and the rest in condition 3 in cases. I have my deployment kit ready to go, right next to the door, and I tell people that I just leave it there so I can put my keys on it.
OK I'm getting off topic. Here's the deal: Returning to a normal state of mind from wartime PTSD means that you need to readdress those old stimuli (bangs, sirens, crying children, burning garbage) and instead of thinking BANG, "OMG I'm going to die," you need to think, "Backfire/July 4th/deer season/etc."
It is very difficult to do that when your life WAS on the line and now it isn't. Try telling your brain that, OK, maybe BEFORE it was reasonable to think that an explosion was cause for alarm because you saw explosions kill people. Makes sense, I know. But now here in sunny boringville, explosions ain't no thang. They ain't no thang but a chicken waing. And THAT the problem facing chaplains and therapists (and families) since war began.
This VR device walks you step-by-step through a situation, all the while under the therapists observation. You would be answering questions the whole time: How does this make you feel? What do you imagine is around this corner? I noticed that you are hiding in a staircase; why is that? And so on. The point of all this is to make the brain aware of what it's doing and rearrange major parts of itself.
This task is difficult; I'd compare it to the task of convincing a xtian that god doesn't exist or, to be fair, convincing an atheist that god does exist. You're talking about changing who a person IS in a major way. The only thing that makes this cognitive therapy somewhat more effective than proselytizing is that it's based on facts and not faith, at least to some degree. The point of the therapy is to get a soldier to the point where he isn't acting like he's still on the battlefield. The therapist's job is to point out the differences.
I hope this helps someone. And any vets that read this: look up your local VA or vet center. There's no shame in getting help.
Air Force here- spent a lot of time around Predators and the equipment they are discussing. This article did not come as a surprise to me at all; in fact, I would say that this story was a non-story. Airborne weapons and avionics are designed to be modular and interchangeable. Outside of the actual flight computers, there is no reason that electronics like, for example, a laser targeting pod from an F-16 can't be mounted on an F-15. Heck, even the mounting hardware is the same.
This story is yet another "We're doing X, but IN SPAAAAACCE!!!" or "We're doing Y, but on WEEEEEEEED!!!".
This article could be about installing a Sony CD deck in a chevy. OMG!!!
I don't know what it is about the predator that gets/. stories up to 400-600 comments. Transformers was a movie. Robocop was a movie. These things are simply unmanned, remotely-piloted aircraft. They are slow and ungainly and prone to malfunction*. We've been using unmanned, remotely-piloted aircraft as drones since the early cold war. Your paranoia about the coming police state would be better spent on issues like voting machines and unconstitutional laws- you know, things that actually matter at this point. When the predators start coming for you, it will be because your elected officials passed laws to make it legal to hunt you down. Make your votes count this year.
Would you allow your wife to be impregnated by a man who was genetically superior to you (however you want to define 'superior': better eyesight, better looks, no heart disease, hates emacs)?
Everything else would stay the same. You'd raise the child like it was your own. Your wife would never see the other guy again. But you could almost guarantee that your child would grow up to be healthier and more attractive than you (and happier as a result).
I have (corrected) terrible vision, genes for cancers, bladder stones, heart disease, hypertension, depression, alcoholism, alzheimers... While those genes have not expressed themselves yet, I would feel more than a little regret by bringing a child into the world with those little time-bombs.
OTOH, a child sired by another man would be a daily living reminder of my own inferiority, even if it's not my fault.
>>Who am I to block their ads when I'm receiving free content?
You the user create over 99% of the content found at slashdot, submit almost all of the stories, and do almost all the work of editing and story selection. I'd say/. is getting a pretty good deal even without ads. Since you posted, you are no longer receiving free goods. To you, this is a discussion; to the site owners, your post was content that draws readers.
Sounds like what we 'mericans call 'friction tape' . You would be hard pressed to find a garage in the upper midwest that doesn't have 2 or 3 partial rolls of it lying about.
We use it for creating a more grippable surface on hockey sticks and the like. Some people even use it as a substitute for electrical tape (but not for long).
And anyone at least a little familiar with theatre or other stage productions knows what gaffer tape is.
I didn't mean to polarize the discussion by using Apple as the example; it was already being discussed. What I said applies to any company and I resent being called an Apple apologist just because I don't think companies and governments should play by the same rules.
And OK, maybe I should revise my argument to accept that companies can indeed censor, but that they reserve and deserve the right to do so. This has nothing to do with Apple. I've erased comments on my blog because they were baseless, insulting, or profane (my family reads it as well as my crude coworkers). If I ran a company and I ran a support forum for my product, you're damn right I'd try to get rid of posts that basically amount to advertising for my competition. If I ran an advertising company, I wouldn't allow the KKK or the xtian right to buy space from me- it's my company and I'll choose what messages get associated with my name. That may be censorship, but I believe that I would be in the right by doing it. The government, like I said before, plays by a different set of rules.
Censorship is typically understood to mean the redaction of inconvenient literature or media by the ruling government. Private companies and individuals are exempt from the term censorship. A newspaper 86ing a flamebait editorial, a newsgroup cutting out useless or inflammatory comments, or a homeowner removing graffiti from his house: these are all perfectly fine. You may, if you wish, post your critical comments about Apple, Inc. on any number of apple-related websites besides the actual apple-owned support site.
The difference is that you are free to chose another company or private entity to solicit, while the one gov't you have is the ONLY gov't you have (and that gov't wields real power over you).
Let's not put Apple, Inc. on the same moral plane as national governments, ok?
Also, in many hacking cases the quoted damages include the cost of hiring someone to patch the security vulnerability. I'm sure that in this situation that is also true; i.e., that $12,000 is a $500 phone bill and a $11,500 consultant fee.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're interested in Balad, here are the pictures I took the first time around. Nothing too revealing, but you get the general lay of the land.
http://homepage.mac.com/hylic/vacation/index.html
Take it easy-
-b
Or they were taken at the start of the war and never updated, goofball. These pics aren't in real time.
My base was the same way. Has been for years.
-b
As a historian, you might want to stick to history. The Google images for Balad have been incorrect since about 6 months into the war. I've been there several times and planning any kind of attack based on the Google pics would get you no where. There aren't barracks areas; housing is distributed all around the base. SOCOM forces have lots of C-130's, not helicopters.
Balad airbase is a lot bigger than those Google pics make it out to be. Oh and for the record, those helicopters you see on the southeast runway approach are most likely taxiing towards the runway- they wouldn't be parked that far from cover (it's a 200 yard run to that HAS right next to them).
There are entire sections of flightline and taxiways that don't show up on Google. Huge buildings (super-walmart-size) that are newer than the google pics. All of those tents and trailers have been moved several times since these photos.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is that these pics really are ancient history as far as the war is concerned.
-b
That's why we... er... THEY blur out so many harmless and strategically useless locations. It poisons the data pool when looking for actual 'stuff' that might be important.
It's almost insulting that the place I work ISN'T blurred out.
-b
You are correct. I wrote that post before coffee and my mind was thinking about h2o->h2+02->h20 types of engines while I was writing about IC type engines.
Funny what you'll say when you're not entirely awake.
-b
If your diesel fuel is a suspension of extremely fine non-conductive particles, you have bigger problems than efficiency. Those injector heads will not tolerate any kind of particles.
I suspect they misused the word "electrorheological" or else they have a definition that doesn't include particles.
-b
So we have to do extensive scientific testing on every two-bit invention and patent that comes along? I have to do testing before I can claim that the dozens of air intake fans don't help efficiency? That the "just keep the jar full of water and the car will run off of the H and O produced by electrolysis" is a scam?
I always kind of assumed that the reason new and dodgy-sounding inventions came onto the market without scientific testing is because the sellers know damn well that the device would fail any kind of inspection.
Witness:
-Kinoki foot pads
-magnetic jewelry
-cell phone antenna stickers
-healing crystals
-ultrasonic mosquito repellent
Now you could point out that something like the ultrasonic mosquito repellent actually does have an affect. You could test it and find out that if 100,000 people wore them 24/7, we could collectively receive 2% less bites. Maybe statistically significant, but useless to me if 2% less bites still equals more than 100 bites that I DO receive.
So my degree is not chem or physics. I'll tell you what, though- a large part of my job is painting (industrial, aircraft painting). We use electrostatic spray guns all the time, and I have never once seen a gun with the electrical element inside the gun. They are all on the outside, inside the jet stream, and where they are very vulnerable to being broken or killing someone. Powder coating booths (which also rely on e- charge) work on the same principle.
That is why my vote goes to the bullshit camp. I find it hard to believe that they either
-discovered a new kind of EM field
-can create a field strong enough to polarize hydrocarbons without interfering with the operation of the vehicle or any other electronic device withing 1/4 mile.
-b
>>so I doubt an electrical field has much influence if any at all on such a liquid.
I'm just going to throw this out there- I was under the impression that the so-called "electrical field" was actually heat; i.e., all this device does is heat up the fuel in the supply line to reduce its viscosity. This would work, but I think that physics might have something to say about the potential return of energy that this device produced vs the amount of energy it consumes.
My two cents.
-b
ah, that clears things up. Thanks!
-b
So, I was under the impression the information couldn't be transmitted faster than the speed of light. From what I understand, even the experiments using entangled particles preserve the speed limit.
So it would seem interesting that the bodies outside our observable bubble are transmitting information (they exist, they are moving this way, etc) faster than their light itself would reach us. Gravity, I am told, also moves at the speed of light.
So how can we have this information without the light?
My only conclusion is that the bodies are dark, but then I am left wondering why they are concentrated at such an arbitrary point in the universe.
-b
Most of the cable and associated structures would burn up on re-entry (or in the case of a rupture, they would fly off into a higher, stable orbit). The remainder of the cable below ~90 miles would have the mass of, oh, a large boulder. And that would land in the pacific ocean. So if and impact with the kinetic energy a medium-sized avalanche is an extinction-level event to you, I'm assuming that you are a species of extraordinarily fragile lichen living along a southern slope of the Pyrenees or something.
-b
>>lots of messages that appear to be from Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz and Jerry Falwell and Bob Dole.
And the creepiest part is that Falwell has been dead for over a year!
-b
You would do well to read 'The Wanting Seed' by Anthony Burgess if you haven't yet. The part that is pertinent to your plot is his descriptions of the phases of gov't: Pelphase, Interphase, and Gusphase.
It is a constantly repeating cycle of:
-The gov't thinking people are generally good and crimes having minor punishments
-The gov't realizes how terrible people really are and steps up the gestapo-style tactics
-The gov't realizes how terrible it has been to its citizens and relaxes the laws, which causes chaos
Here is that part of the wiki article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wanting_Seed#Cyclical_History
It also happens to be a pretty decent book, although not his best.
-b
Sorry, I was referring to:
the above tends to support the traditional military medicine model for treating "shell shock" and "battle fatigue" (as PTSD was know for the past century) by exposure, ie. "return to the battlefield as soon as possible"
I thought that what you meant was that the best therapy for a soldier was to get them back into battlefield mode, either by deploying them again or by letting them pretend that they were still in the battlefield at home. I was saying (in a roundabout way, I suppose) that there is a small but critical difference between returning to the battlefield with the same pathology and returning home and working through the pathology by "keeping the battle alive". I guess I'm having a hard time putting it into words... My understanding was that you were making the VR Iraq out to be video game that allowed soldiers to continue their battlefield emotions instead of resolving them, and I was put into this state of mind by the dozens of up-modded comments that said essentially that. I apologize for the misunderstanding, and I apologize for letting my unchecked emotions rule my comment. I just get fed up with armchair soldiers/psychoanalysts who think that playing Call of Duty makes them qualified to tell me how to deal with my memories. I think I just read too much into your comment. Again, I'm sorry. It looks like I need to go to group more often.
-b
-exposure, ie. "return to the battlefield as soon as possible"
When you have PTSD, there is a difference in returning to the actual battlefield and returning home. The coping mechanisms and traits that you learned on the battlefield are almost by definition very well suited to life on the battlefield; e.g., avoiding wide open spaces, keeping your weapon at the ready, sleeping in body armor, keeping your bags packed, hitting the deck pronto if you hear explosions, etc.
Those traits don't always emotionally expose themselves on the battlefield except as a dull fatigue and apathy. And once the soldier returns home, gets over the big homecoming storm of emotions, and tries to settle into a normal routine- that is when the problems begin. The soldier has been changed from a round peg into a triangle peg and is unable to fit his role in life. This part takes from 6 months to a year to manifest itself. It can come as a surprise to the soldier and to the soldier's family/friends, especially since they might notice it before the soldier does.
I won't go into a big discussion of the symptoms of PTSD. But for the remainder of this discussion I'll disclose that I do fit the textbook descriptions of PTSD: I stick to cover, I shop at night when there are fewer people around, I avoid family gatherings, I avoid talking to anyone who knows anything about who I was prior to my deployments, I sleep with three loaded guns under the bed, one next to the door, one in the silverware drawer, and the rest in condition 3 in cases. I have my deployment kit ready to go, right next to the door, and I tell people that I just leave it there so I can put my keys on it.
OK I'm getting off topic.
Here's the deal: Returning to a normal state of mind from wartime PTSD means that you need to readdress those old stimuli (bangs, sirens, crying children, burning garbage) and instead of thinking BANG, "OMG I'm going to die," you need to think, "Backfire/July 4th/deer season/etc."
It is very difficult to do that when your life WAS on the line and now it isn't. Try telling your brain that, OK, maybe BEFORE it was reasonable to think that an explosion was cause for alarm because you saw explosions kill people. Makes sense, I know. But now here in sunny boringville, explosions ain't no thang. They ain't no thang but a chicken waing. And THAT the problem facing chaplains and therapists (and families) since war began.
This VR device walks you step-by-step through a situation, all the while under the therapists observation. You would be answering questions the whole time: How does this make you feel? What do you imagine is around this corner? I noticed that you are hiding in a staircase; why is that? And so on. The point of all this is to make the brain aware of what it's doing and rearrange major parts of itself.
This task is difficult; I'd compare it to the task of convincing a xtian that god doesn't exist or, to be fair, convincing an atheist that god does exist. You're talking about changing who a person IS in a major way. The only thing that makes this cognitive therapy somewhat more effective than proselytizing is that it's based on facts and not faith, at least to some degree. The point of the therapy is to get a soldier to the point where he isn't acting like he's still on the battlefield. The therapist's job is to point out the differences.
I hope this helps someone. And any vets that read this: look up your local VA or vet center. There's no shame in getting help.
-B out.
I wasn't dismissing UAVs, I was dismissing the sensational articles about them. Sorry about the mix-up.
-b
Air Force here- spent a lot of time around Predators and the equipment they are discussing. This article did not come as a surprise to me at all; in fact, I would say that this story was a non-story. Airborne weapons and avionics are designed to be modular and interchangeable. Outside of the actual flight computers, there is no reason that electronics like, for example, a laser targeting pod from an F-16 can't be mounted on an F-15. Heck, even the mounting hardware is the same.
This story is yet another "We're doing X, but IN SPAAAAACCE!!!" or "We're doing Y, but on WEEEEEEEED!!!".
This article could be about installing a Sony CD deck in a chevy. OMG!!!
I don't know what it is about the predator that gets /. stories up to 400-600 comments. Transformers was a movie. Robocop was a movie. These things are simply unmanned, remotely-piloted aircraft. They are slow and ungainly and prone to malfunction*. We've been using unmanned, remotely-piloted aircraft as drones since the early cold war. Your paranoia about the coming police state would be better spent on issues like voting machines and unconstitutional laws- you know, things that actually matter at this point. When the predators start coming for you, it will be because your elected officials passed laws to make it legal to hunt you down. Make your votes count this year.
*Need proof? here is a picture of one that decided to taxi off the runway and crash for reasons known only to it and the predator god: http://homepage.mac.com/hylic/vacation/index4.html
This was not uncommon during the time I spent there.
-b
Hypothetical question:
Would you allow your wife to be impregnated by a man who was genetically superior to you (however you want to define 'superior': better eyesight, better looks, no heart disease, hates emacs)?
Everything else would stay the same. You'd raise the child like it was your own. Your wife would never see the other guy again. But you could almost guarantee that your child would grow up to be healthier and more attractive than you (and happier as a result).
I have (corrected) terrible vision, genes for cancers, bladder stones, heart disease, hypertension, depression, alcoholism, alzheimers... While those genes have not expressed themselves yet, I would feel more than a little regret by bringing a child into the world with those little time-bombs.
OTOH, a child sired by another man would be a daily living reminder of my own inferiority, even if it's not my fault.
-b
Funny you should say that.
Sarah "hockey mom" Palin took second place in the '84 Miss Alaska beauty pageant.
Looks aside, I wouldn't call her a political 'outsider'. She's been in the business since the early 90's.
-b
>>Who am I to block their ads when I'm receiving free content?
You the user create over 99% of the content found at slashdot, submit almost all of the stories, and do almost all the work of editing and story selection. I'd say /. is getting a pretty good deal even without ads. Since you posted, you are no longer receiving free goods. To you, this is a discussion; to the site owners, your post was content that draws readers.
-b
>>The picture is actually related to the article, since the cow has a map of Earth on her side, with North at her top!
Wouldn't a more accurate photo show the map with North at the cow's head?
-b
Sounds like what we 'mericans call 'friction tape' . You would be hard pressed to find a garage in the upper midwest that doesn't have 2 or 3 partial rolls of it lying about.
We use it for creating a more grippable surface on hockey sticks and the like. Some people even use it as a substitute for electrical tape (but not for long).
And anyone at least a little familiar with theatre or other stage productions knows what gaffer tape is.
-b
I didn't mean to polarize the discussion by using Apple as the example; it was already being discussed. What I said applies to any company and I resent being called an Apple apologist just because I don't think companies and governments should play by the same rules.
And OK, maybe I should revise my argument to accept that companies can indeed censor, but that they reserve and deserve the right to do so. This has nothing to do with Apple. I've erased comments on my blog because they were baseless, insulting, or profane (my family reads it as well as my crude coworkers). If I ran a company and I ran a support forum for my product, you're damn right I'd try to get rid of posts that basically amount to advertising for my competition. If I ran an advertising company, I wouldn't allow the KKK or the xtian right to buy space from me- it's my company and I'll choose what messages get associated with my name. That may be censorship, but I believe that I would be in the right by doing it. The government, like I said before, plays by a different set of rules.
-b
Censorship is typically understood to mean the redaction of inconvenient literature or media by the ruling government. Private companies and individuals are exempt from the term censorship. A newspaper 86ing a flamebait editorial, a newsgroup cutting out useless or inflammatory comments, or a homeowner removing graffiti from his house: these are all perfectly fine. You may, if you wish, post your critical comments about Apple, Inc. on any number of apple-related websites besides the actual apple-owned support site.
The difference is that you are free to chose another company or private entity to solicit, while the one gov't you have is the ONLY gov't you have (and that gov't wields real power over you).
Let's not put Apple, Inc. on the same moral plane as national governments, ok?
-b
Also, in many hacking cases the quoted damages include the cost of hiring someone to patch the security vulnerability. I'm sure that in this situation that is also true; i.e., that $12,000 is a $500 phone bill and a $11,500 consultant fee.
-b