The fact that a state would need a bailout in the first place is a symptom of a larger issue: government, in general, does too much. It spends too much money, its taxes are too high, and it provides too many services.
Having the judiciary working hand in hand with the police and rubberstamping warrants on the site of the alleged crime (the checkpoint) is, in my opinion, a violation of reasonable search and seizure: state law be damned.
Can you cite any particular reason the location of the magistrate issuing the warrant is relevant to the analysis of reasonableness?
The U.S. Constitution defines three distinct roles of the government, providing checks and balances. When two branches collude like this, it breaks down those checks. The judiciary (the magistrate) and the executive (the police) should not, in my opinion, be working together like this. Yes, I know judges rubberstamp warrants all the time, sometimes without even asking questions or seeing evidence. But in this case, there is not even an illusion of separation of powers.
Without any standard, you are at the mercy of the judge or (more likely) jury. A standard, even an imperfect one, is better than nothing: especially given that the court must take the physician at his word regarding quantity of sleep. The only evidence would be time worked in a medical facility. So this would definitely be in favor of a surgeon who could say "sure I worked 16 hours straight but I went home and slept nine hours and woke up refreshed." In reality, he could have gone home and watched DVDs all night, and nobody would know.
And now us doctors will have another reason to be afraid of lawsuits: "Your honor, evidence shows that the defendant was awake for 16 hours straight and did not inform the patient. Thus, he should be found guilty of malpractice!"
If we can quantify standards for sleep deprivation, and if someone such as the AMA comes out with standards, then you need not worry. Find that magic number, which may need to be low to accommodate varying age groups and personal abilities, and then you have a golden standard. If a physician does not have enough sleep according to a defined standard, then he would be obligated to follow a certain procedure. Example: awake more than 16 hours or had less than 6 hours of sleep: inform the patient and offer to reschedule or perform surgery anyway. Awake more than 24 hours or less than 4 hours of sleep: inform the patient that surgery cannot proceed.
If you have a published medical standard or even the force of law behind it, that should be sufficient to protect against lawsuits. The same thing holds true for drunk driving. There is a defined limit, and it works fine in courtrooms all over the nation.
Subject to the Florida constitution and in some cases the US constitution, yes.
Actually, in all cases the U.S. Constitution. It is the supreme law of the land, and supersedes all other legal documents on United States soil. The fourth amendment is in full force in Florida and would be a valid defense against these checkpoints. Having the judiciary working hand in hand with the police and rubberstamping warrants on the site of the alleged crime (the checkpoint) is, in my opinion, a violation of reasonable search and seizure: state law be damned.
You boot licking, cockucking, faggot pussy who would rather trade yours(and everyone else's) freedom for some type of illusionary freedom. Hope your mom and sister, and wife and daughter all get fucking raped by AIDS infected niggers. Because if the cunts were in the kitchen where they belong, they would not have gotten raped.
Forget drinking and driving: this is a perfect example of drinking and posting on Slashdot.
There are several ways, and police are trained in all of them. I have driven through multiple checkpoints and the first thing they do is shine a flashlight at the driver. Did his pupils react correctly? Everyone will squint, but a sober person's pupils will contract. A drunk person's pupils will not react because the alcohol inhibits proper muscle/eye control. That is a huge piece of evidence right there. Does the police officer smell anything coming out of the car? While alcohol is odorless, alcoholic beverages are not and the smell persists for hours after drinking. Those are just the first two signs, and involve neither a breathalyzer nor a field sobriety test.
Without getting out of the car, they can ask questions: say the alphabet, starting with T and ending with S. Drunk people have a surprisingly difficult time with that. Ask for the driver's license. While he is looking for it in his wallet, ask for proof of insurance. If he produces both, great: if he forgets his license and only gives his insurance card, that's another sure sign. Alcohol inhibits short term memory.
These are all signs the officer will look for or questions he will ask to determine if the person "seems sober" or not, and do not require any "real" test like a breathalyzer or blood test.
its not going to be enough residual alcohol to impress a reading. and if you didnt drink at all, *buzzed driving is drunk driving* then your CLEAN breath + the last guys millidrop of alcohol will not register 0.08 so what do you care?
What if your 0.07 plus residual equals 0.09? Suddenly, you are over the limit even if you are not.
and yes, i support the crap out of safe flying associated x-rays. if x-raying some guy to check him for explosives guarantees me a safe flight, i say ZAP AWAY!
I agree, if x-rays did guarantee safe flight, go ahead. However, they do nothing of the sort. It is still trivially easy to sneak weapons through TSA checkpoints: even the TSA's own analysis corroborates this (google it).
What you're really saying is the government is more openly aggressive, in the face of efforts to undermine the world's economy, showing that individual artists, musicians, programmers, and inventors are receiving help from the government to protect their sources of income.
Bullshit. So if I call up the FBI and inform them of copyright infringement of one of my works, they will help? Not likely, unless I also happen to be in the legal department of a Hollywood corporation.
IP law in the United States is written to benefit corporations, not the artists, musicians, programmers, and inventors. The man who "invented" Mickey Mouse is long dead at this point, but the Disney corporation is still profiting from the its perpetual copyright. Whom does IP law benefit? Not its creator.
The US prison system makes very little effort to rehabilitate; contrary to popular myth. Its well known for making prisoners more violent and more proficient criminals.
Citation? I personally know multiple people with varying criminal records who spent time in Federal penitentiaries. Their stays ranged from a year or two in a minimum security prison to multiple years in a maximum security prison where all the really bad criminals go. The stories I hear do not corroborate your claim: perhaps you have links to journalistic investigations, government statistics, etc.?
And it gets even worse. The US system is set up to punish criminals for the rest of their life helping to ensure that once you enter the criminal system you have very little chance of ever making it out.
Again, I disagree. We have halfway houses in this country, which encourage convicts to integrate back into society instead of one day being kicked to the curb after their sentence is over. Companies work closely with halfway houses, providing employment knowingly to convicts and helping them to get back on their feet. Do you have anything to back up your claims?
Worse, they illegally strip their Constitutional rights so as to ensure they have no say in changing the system for the better; even after they've paid their price.
Removing rights through due process of law is a defined process in the Constitution. While incarcerated, inmates are indeed prevented from exercising certain rights such as voting or carrying firearms: however, the rights of liberty and the pursuit of happiness are also removed based on the definition of "prison." The legal system may also remove other rights upon release. For example, someone who uses weapons while committing a crime (armed burglary, murder, whatever) may have their second amendment rights removed temporarily or permanently even after release. I don't see how this is unconstitutional.
As first world industrialized countries go, the US prison system is one of the absolutely worst on the planet.
I agree, but this has more to do with overloading the system due to shitty ideas like the War on Drugs. Seriously, how can you win a war on ideology? Will "Drugs" ever surrender, or be defeated? All it does is create an open-ended conflict with an excuse to through people in jail and spend money on stupid shit that does not help the economy.
The US prison system houses more people than some countries have in total population - and growing.
Once more, citation needed. I have heard this elsewhere, though, and I do know our prison populate is huge compared to most countries both in absolute numbers and as a relative portion of the total population. I think only Russia and China are close.
Notice the steep rise in incarcerations after declaring the war on drugs.
We have a winner! This is one of those universal truths like gravity that you don't need a citation for. I can't stand crap like the wars on drugs and terror. All they do is remove rights and spend money on stupid crap.
goodness. i'm teaching a large lecture class and we already do this. i think it's been going on, on a large scale, for 5-10 years. this doesn't matter? seriously?
While it specifically mentions integrating with Microsoft technology (e.g. OneNote), I wonder if it is similar enough to technology used in game shows, or even Congress, for voting.
It's always been a big No-No to transfer any device from a NIPR (non-classified internet) client to a SIPR client, of course.
I think you reversed your NIPR and SIPR. Regardless, it is ok to transfer data from SIPRNET to NIPRNET, but it has to go through designated systems that are monitored by people authorized to verify that the data moving to a lower classification network actually is classified at that level. There is a procedure to do this, it just takes multiple people and between several hours and several days.
The big no-no is someone taking their own removable media and moving data between systems without authorization and without following the specified procedures.
A person can easily hide a usb stick somewhere on their person, and in the event that fails, take screenshots with a camera or write notes down.
Removable media, cameras, or phones with cameras are not and have not been allowed in SCIFs for as long as I remember. Old fashioned paper and pencil is difficult to detect, as are meat memory devices.
The first step is not to take away the usb stick, but to give the individual in question the training and incentive not to leak information in the first place.
No, that does not work. You have to choose who you trust, which is why DSA performs investigations for all military personnel before granting clearances. Security managers interview personnel and ask questions, looking for warning signs. Someone could have a pristine history and list of contacts but still want to do harm: asking the right questions can tip off the people in charge of security. Also, as I saw on Dateline the other night with regards to corruption in the Iraqi police force, paying people a livable wage helps them not to betray you when given a carrot in the form of money, or the satisfaction of fucking with you (e.g. giving documents to Wikileaks).
Security is a tough business. The government needs tens of thousands of people in the intelligence community across all four branches of the military and civilians in various DOD organizations: people from all walks of life, all ages, ethnic groups, geographic locations, etc. No matter how careful they are, there will be leaks. Their goal is to detect internal threats early, and to minimize damage.
For example, when working in a classified environment, everyone is watching not only what they are doing, but keeping an eye on everyone else. Maybe someone left their SIPRNET terminal unlocked and left for the bathroom: probably just careless, but it is important to have coworkers keep an eye out for innocent errors and help correct them. Maybe someone really is trying to steal data: coworkers need to question that person why they are not following approved and document security procedures. Maybe there is a legitimate reason for putting data on removable media: couriers do exist even in the current era of high speed private networks such as SIPRNET.
Finally, by limiting the data each person has, a breach can be localized. For example, if an image analyst steals satellite imagery, odds are that person does not have access to lists of informants, even if it is classified at the same level. That lessens the impact of a leak.
The real failure with that kid that leaked to Wikileaks is the human factor: nobody paid attention, asking him why he was not following procedures. Someone gave him access to far more data than he needed to do his job. Forget the USB drive restrictions, the DOD needs to crack down on basic security training and protocol.
You do know that Social Security and Medicare are paid from their own payroll deductions, not income tax? Your income tax is mostly paying for wars and military occupations. I'm guessing you'd be OK with that if only no poor people in America could benefit from it?
Interesting. Only the federal government is allowed to declare wars or invade other countries. My state income taxes do not pay for warmongering, but certainly do pay for the state-run schools, as do my local income taxes.
Why is it that every two years for the past six years I have had a school levy on the ballot that was not from the same level of government that declares wars and invades countries?
To be criminal mean i.e. to go against the laws of your country. If you define the laws, and go according to them, then you aren't a criminal, whatever the laws of another countries say. In fact, under the laws of another country, you or your government could be criminals (think how far from that was Bush last period). Not so much defending North Korea, just attacking that way of reasoning.
There are also international treaties, such as the one that created the United Nations. Any signatory to the U.N. charter must abide by its rules, which includes the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Is The Best Korea a signatory? I couldn't get Google to turn up any information on the topic.
3) Good luck, if they were to do such a thing, business would pull out of China and international trade with their largest trading partners would collapse to a standstill. I don't think you thought your cunning plan all the way through.
I don't think you understand what he was saying. For all the R&D the U.S. does, it still needs factories with the blueprints, plans, etc. and those are in China. If they nationalize factories, they are holding all of the IP. If they stop exporting, the U.S. would immediately go into a recession, probably a depression. I'm not sure how many of our manufactured goods come from China, but I know it is enough that if they stopped exporting, we wouldn't have basic necessities. China would definitely take an economic hit, but it is holding all of the cards: they will have the factories, the IP, and enough logistics to keep trading elsewhere if need be. But they would be able to provide for themselves. Sure, they may lose a few million to starvation since they have a hard time producing enough food, but that would also solve their population problem.
China, or more accurately Wall Street's race to the bottom which involves placing our nuts firmly in China's grasp, is the single greatest threat to our nation in this century.
The die size is larger, the clock speeds slower, etc. With fewer traces and slower signals, any interference on the wires is far less likely to cause incorrect computations. It's not just that they're hardened, it's that even if radiation gets in there, 1 + 1 is still 99.9999% likely to equal 3.
If a town's revenue is dependent on excessive speeding tickets, then the town't budget has serious problems. The idea that they need that ticket revenue to meet their budget is a ridiculous excuse.
I agree. If the local government needs money, pass a levy. If the voters shoot it down, do what us normal people do faced with a budget shortfall: cut spending.
They know they law, they know when you are breaking it and with what you can be charged.
Yeah, but who is going to make the arrest?
That's mostly snarky but it's also a comment on the separation of powers. A judge can do a lot, but he can't physically enforce the law. But you are absolutely right: he can do a lot.
The bailiff will make the arrest. You know, since they work for the judicial branch, not the police department.
Actually the preferred method is to use crooks who don't have a record and therefore don't have prints on file. If the cops have you to compare the prints you are already busted.
The "police" have my fingerprints on file and I have no criminal record. As a requirement to get a security clearance with the military, the FBI fingerprinted me and put me in their database. All ten digits, two prints each. Granted I never got to see any classified data, but still, they have those fingerprints and of course they will never get rid of them.
This is pure conjecture, but I expect that most law enforcement, military, some defense contractors, etc. would all be fingerprinted and those prints stored in the FBI database. Even if these people are less likely to commit "normal" crimes, I imagine people with everyday access to classified material are far more likely to commit espionage or leak classified information than the general public who does not have access to that information. Having their prints and other information on file will help answer the question "we have a mole, but who is it?"
I feel dirty for saying it, but I trust Microsoft more than Oracle. Oracle pretends to be your friend, then backstabs you and leaves you with a huge bill. You already know Microsoft is out to get you.
Lately, I think Microsoft is actually producing better software, too. SQL Server has increased tremendously, Visual Studio is top-notch, Windows 7 I hear is very good, etc. Sure, Office (especially Outlook) is ugly and has warts, but overall, they're doing better than they were ten years ago.
I installed Oracle on my system at work to use for development. A single database instance consumes 250MB of RAM. Seriously? SQL Server takes a quarter of that and doesn't impact performance much. SQL Server is able to comprehend that it is on a development machine, not a server. Oracle immediately goes into "rape the computer" mode as soon as it installs. It is almost as evil as SAP.
Depending on your definition of what is a "major" database, you may want to add PostgreSQL to your list.
Thanks. I have several databases installed and I use them, but I'm not much of a DBA. I just use them for tables, and I write SQL (or I don't, and use an ORM library). Regardless, my original statement of how Oracle has wood for Java still holds. They seem to be betting their future on integrating it into their products and services. Hell, they bought Sun, a broken husk of a company, for way too much money just to own Java.
they just layered more and more band-aids and duct tape on top of each other.
I think you're giving the argument why there's a general loss of confidence in Java. Google could (and probably will) do a lot better with a language that looks "quite a lot like" Java, yet isn't, in much the same way Microsoft did with C#. I'll be happy to see Java die off and be replaced with better. My biggest problem is that there will be several 'evolutionary' new languages instead of 1, but then, at the moment proprietary lock-in seems to be back with us again.
I agree, I think one of the best things for Java would be for Oracle to drive it into the ground while Google or someone else creates a Java-alike language. Ideally it would get rid of a lot of the baggage that Java has been carrying around for more than ten years, while adding new, good features like I know Google would.
Looks like we're seeing a new loss of confidence in Java, much like the loss of confidence in mono, for which patent concerns stunted its uptake.
No, we are seeing a loss of confidence in Oracle. Unfortunately, Oracle now owns Java. That means its future is a little foggy. Oracle has a serious hard-on for Java, which you can see because it is the only major database I know of that allows you to use Java in place of PL/SQL. Disclaimer: I haven't actually done this, but I did read about it while googling some issues I was having with an Oracle database.
So where to next?
I think there is room for two cross-platform environments such as.NET and Java. Right now, those are the players. I don't see the F/OSS community putting all their eggs in Microsoft's basket, even if people do use Mono to some extent. If Oracle succeeds in making Java their pool boy and effectively neutering OSS implementations of the language and JFC, another environment will need to rise to to the occasion. I think it would be a community effort to some degree, but driven largely by Google. I could see them forking Java and realizing that due to trademark and patent concerns they would need to make large changes, so they would make major changes, add a bunch of stuff, and turn it into one hell of a platform for mobile and network development. That was Java's original goal, but it has since bloated up well beyond that and I do mean bloat, not grow. Why do we need a total of three implementations of core JFC classes to do stuff like "read a JPEG," and two of them either don't work at all or only work if you drink unicorn blood while coding? Why are there two GUI implementations, and the one that makes sense is still a zombie built on top of decaying pieces of the AWT corpse?
Sun had so many opportunities to grow the JFC, add value, etc. but due to their intense fear of breaking backwards compatibility, they just layered more and more band-aids and duct tape on top of each other. At some point you need to do it right with new implementations and say "upgrade to version X, and deprecated crap is being removed. You are now warned."
Also, Java EE needs to be merged into Java SE. There should be two Javas. One for memory-constrained devices (embedded), and one for everywhere else. Java EE has been a pain in my ass for some time. Java doesn't need the extra complexity.
I mean, they (Sun) open-sourced a huge chunk of it did they not?
It might mean having to remake some of the libraries, but hey, anything away from Oracles grip, right? As great as they are with their services, they can be complete asses at times.
Sun did open source Java, and did wind up rewriting some of the native libraries to make it possible. What would happen, however, is renaming it due to trademarks now owned by Oracle. That brings up questions such as would Google need to rename portions of the code, such as package names? The entire JFC exists in the java.* and javax.* packages. What about the sun.* classes that are used under the covers? Those would be easier, since developers aren't supposed to use them directly.
I think "open source Java" is a reality, but forking the project is not as easy as it sounds.
Slashdot Mirror
The fact that a state would need a bailout in the first place is a symptom of a larger issue: government, in general, does too much. It spends too much money, its taxes are too high, and it provides too many services.
The U.S. Constitution defines three distinct roles of the government, providing checks and balances. When two branches collude like this, it breaks down those checks. The judiciary (the magistrate) and the executive (the police) should not, in my opinion, be working together like this. Yes, I know judges rubberstamp warrants all the time, sometimes without even asking questions or seeing evidence. But in this case, there is not even an illusion of separation of powers.
Without any standard, you are at the mercy of the judge or (more likely) jury. A standard, even an imperfect one, is better than nothing: especially given that the court must take the physician at his word regarding quantity of sleep. The only evidence would be time worked in a medical facility. So this would definitely be in favor of a surgeon who could say "sure I worked 16 hours straight but I went home and slept nine hours and woke up refreshed." In reality, he could have gone home and watched DVDs all night, and nobody would know.
If we can quantify standards for sleep deprivation, and if someone such as the AMA comes out with standards, then you need not worry. Find that magic number, which may need to be low to accommodate varying age groups and personal abilities, and then you have a golden standard. If a physician does not have enough sleep according to a defined standard, then he would be obligated to follow a certain procedure. Example: awake more than 16 hours or had less than 6 hours of sleep: inform the patient and offer to reschedule or perform surgery anyway. Awake more than 24 hours or less than 4 hours of sleep: inform the patient that surgery cannot proceed.
If you have a published medical standard or even the force of law behind it, that should be sufficient to protect against lawsuits. The same thing holds true for drunk driving. There is a defined limit, and it works fine in courtrooms all over the nation.
Actually, in all cases the U.S. Constitution. It is the supreme law of the land, and supersedes all other legal documents on United States soil. The fourth amendment is in full force in Florida and would be a valid defense against these checkpoints. Having the judiciary working hand in hand with the police and rubberstamping warrants on the site of the alleged crime (the checkpoint) is, in my opinion, a violation of reasonable search and seizure: state law be damned.
Forget drinking and driving: this is a perfect example of drinking and posting on Slashdot.
There are several ways, and police are trained in all of them. I have driven through multiple checkpoints and the first thing they do is shine a flashlight at the driver. Did his pupils react correctly? Everyone will squint, but a sober person's pupils will contract. A drunk person's pupils will not react because the alcohol inhibits proper muscle/eye control. That is a huge piece of evidence right there. Does the police officer smell anything coming out of the car? While alcohol is odorless, alcoholic beverages are not and the smell persists for hours after drinking. Those are just the first two signs, and involve neither a breathalyzer nor a field sobriety test.
Without getting out of the car, they can ask questions: say the alphabet, starting with T and ending with S. Drunk people have a surprisingly difficult time with that. Ask for the driver's license. While he is looking for it in his wallet, ask for proof of insurance. If he produces both, great: if he forgets his license and only gives his insurance card, that's another sure sign. Alcohol inhibits short term memory.
These are all signs the officer will look for or questions he will ask to determine if the person "seems sober" or not, and do not require any "real" test like a breathalyzer or blood test.
What if your 0.07 plus residual equals 0.09? Suddenly, you are over the limit even if you are not.
I agree, if x-rays did guarantee safe flight, go ahead. However, they do nothing of the sort. It is still trivially easy to sneak weapons through TSA checkpoints: even the TSA's own analysis corroborates this (google it).
Bullshit. So if I call up the FBI and inform them of copyright infringement of one of my works, they will help? Not likely, unless I also happen to be in the legal department of a Hollywood corporation.
IP law in the United States is written to benefit corporations, not the artists, musicians, programmers, and inventors. The man who "invented" Mickey Mouse is long dead at this point, but the Disney corporation is still profiting from the its perpetual copyright. Whom does IP law benefit? Not its creator.
Citation? I personally know multiple people with varying criminal records who spent time in Federal penitentiaries. Their stays ranged from a year or two in a minimum security prison to multiple years in a maximum security prison where all the really bad criminals go. The stories I hear do not corroborate your claim: perhaps you have links to journalistic investigations, government statistics, etc.?
Again, I disagree. We have halfway houses in this country, which encourage convicts to integrate back into society instead of one day being kicked to the curb after their sentence is over. Companies work closely with halfway houses, providing employment knowingly to convicts and helping them to get back on their feet. Do you have anything to back up your claims?
Removing rights through due process of law is a defined process in the Constitution. While incarcerated, inmates are indeed prevented from exercising certain rights such as voting or carrying firearms: however, the rights of liberty and the pursuit of happiness are also removed based on the definition of "prison." The legal system may also remove other rights upon release. For example, someone who uses weapons while committing a crime (armed burglary, murder, whatever) may have their second amendment rights removed temporarily or permanently even after release. I don't see how this is unconstitutional.
I agree, but this has more to do with overloading the system due to shitty ideas like the War on Drugs. Seriously, how can you win a war on ideology? Will "Drugs" ever surrender, or be defeated? All it does is create an open-ended conflict with an excuse to through people in jail and spend money on stupid shit that does not help the economy.
Once more, citation needed. I have heard this elsewhere, though, and I do know our prison populate is huge compared to most countries both in absolute numbers and as a relative portion of the total population. I think only Russia and China are close.
We have a winner! This is one of those universal truths like gravity that you don't need a citation for. I can't stand crap like the wars on drugs and terror. All they do is remove rights and spend money on stupid crap.
While it specifically mentions integrating with Microsoft technology (e.g. OneNote), I wonder if it is similar enough to technology used in game shows, or even Congress, for voting.
Prior art?
I think you reversed your NIPR and SIPR. Regardless, it is ok to transfer data from SIPRNET to NIPRNET, but it has to go through designated systems that are monitored by people authorized to verify that the data moving to a lower classification network actually is classified at that level. There is a procedure to do this, it just takes multiple people and between several hours and several days.
The big no-no is someone taking their own removable media and moving data between systems without authorization and without following the specified procedures.
Removable media, cameras, or phones with cameras are not and have not been allowed in SCIFs for as long as I remember. Old fashioned paper and pencil is difficult to detect, as are meat memory devices.
No, that does not work. You have to choose who you trust, which is why DSA performs investigations for all military personnel before granting clearances. Security managers interview personnel and ask questions, looking for warning signs. Someone could have a pristine history and list of contacts but still want to do harm: asking the right questions can tip off the people in charge of security. Also, as I saw on Dateline the other night with regards to corruption in the Iraqi police force, paying people a livable wage helps them not to betray you when given a carrot in the form of money, or the satisfaction of fucking with you (e.g. giving documents to Wikileaks).
Security is a tough business. The government needs tens of thousands of people in the intelligence community across all four branches of the military and civilians in various DOD organizations: people from all walks of life, all ages, ethnic groups, geographic locations, etc. No matter how careful they are, there will be leaks. Their goal is to detect internal threats early, and to minimize damage.
For example, when working in a classified environment, everyone is watching not only what they are doing, but keeping an eye on everyone else. Maybe someone left their SIPRNET terminal unlocked and left for the bathroom: probably just careless, but it is important to have coworkers keep an eye out for innocent errors and help correct them. Maybe someone really is trying to steal data: coworkers need to question that person why they are not following approved and document security procedures. Maybe there is a legitimate reason for putting data on removable media: couriers do exist even in the current era of high speed private networks such as SIPRNET.
Finally, by limiting the data each person has, a breach can be localized. For example, if an image analyst steals satellite imagery, odds are that person does not have access to lists of informants, even if it is classified at the same level. That lessens the impact of a leak.
The real failure with that kid that leaked to Wikileaks is the human factor: nobody paid attention, asking him why he was not following procedures. Someone gave him access to far more data than he needed to do his job. Forget the USB drive restrictions, the DOD needs to crack down on basic security training and protocol.
Interesting. Only the federal government is allowed to declare wars or invade other countries. My state income taxes do not pay for warmongering, but certainly do pay for the state-run schools, as do my local income taxes.
Why is it that every two years for the past six years I have had a school levy on the ballot that was not from the same level of government that declares wars and invades countries?
There are also international treaties, such as the one that created the United Nations. Any signatory to the U.N. charter must abide by its rules, which includes the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Is The Best Korea a signatory? I couldn't get Google to turn up any information on the topic.
I don't think you understand what he was saying. For all the R&D the U.S. does, it still needs factories with the blueprints, plans, etc. and those are in China. If they nationalize factories, they are holding all of the IP. If they stop exporting, the U.S. would immediately go into a recession, probably a depression. I'm not sure how many of our manufactured goods come from China, but I know it is enough that if they stopped exporting, we wouldn't have basic necessities. China would definitely take an economic hit, but it is holding all of the cards: they will have the factories, the IP, and enough logistics to keep trading elsewhere if need be. But they would be able to provide for themselves. Sure, they may lose a few million to starvation since they have a hard time producing enough food, but that would also solve their population problem.
China, or more accurately Wall Street's race to the bottom which involves placing our nuts firmly in China's grasp, is the single greatest threat to our nation in this century.
The die size is larger, the clock speeds slower, etc. With fewer traces and slower signals, any interference on the wires is far less likely to cause incorrect computations. It's not just that they're hardened, it's that even if radiation gets in there, 1 + 1 is still 99.9999% likely to equal 3.
I agree. If the local government needs money, pass a levy. If the voters shoot it down, do what us normal people do faced with a budget shortfall: cut spending.
The bailiff will make the arrest. You know, since they work for the judicial branch, not the police department.
The "police" have my fingerprints on file and I have no criminal record. As a requirement to get a security clearance with the military, the FBI fingerprinted me and put me in their database. All ten digits, two prints each. Granted I never got to see any classified data, but still, they have those fingerprints and of course they will never get rid of them.
This is pure conjecture, but I expect that most law enforcement, military, some defense contractors, etc. would all be fingerprinted and those prints stored in the FBI database. Even if these people are less likely to commit "normal" crimes, I imagine people with everyday access to classified material are far more likely to commit espionage or leak classified information than the general public who does not have access to that information. Having their prints and other information on file will help answer the question "we have a mole, but who is it?"
I feel dirty for saying it, but I trust Microsoft more than Oracle. Oracle pretends to be your friend, then backstabs you and leaves you with a huge bill. You already know Microsoft is out to get you.
Lately, I think Microsoft is actually producing better software, too. SQL Server has increased tremendously, Visual Studio is top-notch, Windows 7 I hear is very good, etc. Sure, Office (especially Outlook) is ugly and has warts, but overall, they're doing better than they were ten years ago.
I installed Oracle on my system at work to use for development. A single database instance consumes 250MB of RAM. Seriously? SQL Server takes a quarter of that and doesn't impact performance much. SQL Server is able to comprehend that it is on a development machine, not a server. Oracle immediately goes into "rape the computer" mode as soon as it installs. It is almost as evil as SAP.
Thanks. I have several databases installed and I use them, but I'm not much of a DBA. I just use them for tables, and I write SQL (or I don't, and use an ORM library). Regardless, my original statement of how Oracle has wood for Java still holds. They seem to be betting their future on integrating it into their products and services. Hell, they bought Sun, a broken husk of a company, for way too much money just to own Java.
I agree, I think one of the best things for Java would be for Oracle to drive it into the ground while Google or someone else creates a Java-alike language. Ideally it would get rid of a lot of the baggage that Java has been carrying around for more than ten years, while adding new, good features like I know Google would.
No, we are seeing a loss of confidence in Oracle. Unfortunately, Oracle now owns Java. That means its future is a little foggy. Oracle has a serious hard-on for Java, which you can see because it is the only major database I know of that allows you to use Java in place of PL/SQL. Disclaimer: I haven't actually done this, but I did read about it while googling some issues I was having with an Oracle database.
I think there is room for two cross-platform environments such as .NET and Java. Right now, those are the players. I don't see the F/OSS community putting all their eggs in Microsoft's basket, even if people do use Mono to some extent. If Oracle succeeds in making Java their pool boy and effectively neutering OSS implementations of the language and JFC, another environment will need to rise to to the occasion. I think it would be a community effort to some degree, but driven largely by Google. I could see them forking Java and realizing that due to trademark and patent concerns they would need to make large changes, so they would make major changes, add a bunch of stuff, and turn it into one hell of a platform for mobile and network development. That was Java's original goal, but it has since bloated up well beyond that and I do mean bloat, not grow. Why do we need a total of three implementations of core JFC classes to do stuff like "read a JPEG," and two of them either don't work at all or only work if you drink unicorn blood while coding? Why are there two GUI implementations, and the one that makes sense is still a zombie built on top of decaying pieces of the AWT corpse?
Sun had so many opportunities to grow the JFC, add value, etc. but due to their intense fear of breaking backwards compatibility, they just layered more and more band-aids and duct tape on top of each other. At some point you need to do it right with new implementations and say "upgrade to version X, and deprecated crap is being removed. You are now warned."
Also, Java EE needs to be merged into Java SE. There should be two Javas. One for memory-constrained devices (embedded), and one for everywhere else. Java EE has been a pain in my ass for some time. Java doesn't need the extra complexity.
Sun did open source Java, and did wind up rewriting some of the native libraries to make it possible. What would happen, however, is renaming it due to trademarks now owned by Oracle. That brings up questions such as would Google need to rename portions of the code, such as package names? The entire JFC exists in the java.* and javax.* packages. What about the sun.* classes that are used under the covers? Those would be easier, since developers aren't supposed to use them directly.
I think "open source Java" is a reality, but forking the project is not as easy as it sounds.