All she needs to do is let someone add all the other members of parliament to the same group, then demand that House Rules be enforced on them too. Actually, instead of just this one group, there's probably hundreds of objectionable groups you could add them to.
If they don't have FaceBook accounts, just make new accounts in their names. Surely they are responsible if someone made a FaceBook account in their name and then added them to the group?
An extra capacitor could probably take care of that. Capacitors are quite good at keeping a large charge for a relatively short time. Perfect for start-stop driving. You will lose any leftover charge when you park the car for more than a few minutes, though.
They in no way limit your vision in any significant way, certainly no worse than sunglasses and which pilot isn't usally rockin a set of aviator shades?
I don't know any pilots who wear aviator shades at night
And why do you think it's normal and acceptable that airlines would have to spend shitloads of money to apply expensive coatings to airplane windows just because some idiots like to shine lasers onto them? What's next? Bullet proof windows so people can fire guns at aircraft? Surely, a prohibition on firing guns at aircraft would be overbearing, right?
Except on an ILS Cat. III C automatic landing with no minimum visibility requirement. But only very few airplanes are equipped for those, the vast majority are only approved for landing with some mimimum visibility, even on autopilot. And you still have to be able to leave the runway and taxi to the parking position.
I wish airplane technology was anywhere near that level. Even the most recent planes are still using relatively old but proven technology, they are nowhere near approving the replacement of windows with displays. The resolution would have to be huge, as well, to approximate the level of detail we can see through a window.
Not to mention older airplanes, some of which still use floppy disks to perform updates to the navigation database. Head up displays do exist (as an option, and one that is relatively rarely picked by airlines), but they are a lot more basic than what you are suggesting. It would be impossible to retrofit all existing planes with the kind of system you are describing.
And no matter what, there would have to be a way of quickly stowing those displays in case of a malfunction, so we can look outside through the window again. There's no way an aircraft would be approved for flight if there was no way of flying visually if everything else fails. Sure, it can all be solved, but I don't see it happening in the near future.
IOS does, through the NSCache interface. You can allocate as much as you like, and the OS will automatically get rid of it if it needs to. Also, your app can respond to low memory warnings so it can free up memory before being forced to quit completely.
I know of at least one pilot who got permanent eye damage after a laser strike, and who can no longer fly. The beam becomes pretty wide at that distance but is still strong enough to cause serious damage.
I would bet that the pilot would have plenty of time to see the dot and grab the protection after he sees it, are there even any documented cases of a pilot being blinded by a laser? How many compared to reports of beams on aircraft? (also of note, passengers being blinded, while not life threatening to the whole plane, is still bad and unconscionable)
I have flown with colleagues who have been hit by a laser and who were blinded for a few minutes, having to transfer control to the other pilot but fortunately without permanent eye damage. It's a very sudden flash without warning. Laser light is very focused, so you don't see any "dot" until it's pointed directly at you.
Even worse, I have heard of at least one pilot who has actually lost his license due to permanent eye damage after a laser strike. What a fun game, isn't it?
Taking precautions against them, especially small, cheap precautions (like door locks and protective glasses) which are effective against some of the more common problems, makes sense....
If only there was a way of keeping laser light out and letting other light in so the pilots can still see the runway at night... Yes, even with all the modern electronic guidance systems, being able to look outside is still one of the very basic safety features of any aircraft.
And what exactly is the "practical solution" for keeping laser light out of windows which are designed to give pilots the best possible view outside? Any new materials I don't know of that keep laser light out but let other light through so pilots can still see the ground at night?
I don't think it's "overbearing" to make it illegal to shine lasers at aircraft.
I do think the punishment is a bit harsh for a 19 year old first offender who probably had no idea that what he was doing was so dangerous.
Lots of people use dynamic IP addresses. The address you are blocking now, may well belong to a perfectly innocent user tomorrow. You're blocking the wrong people.
What I don't understand, is why lawsuits in the US have to cost millions of dollars. Where does all the money go? Surely, in the case of a clearly frivolous lawsuit, if you take just one single lawyer with experience in copyright law, and you let him work full time for an entire month (without working on any other cases), he's unlikely to find any new arguments after that. So what would that cost, a lawyer for a month? $10,000? $20,000? We're still far, far away from millions! So what else are they doing? Why do you need whole teams of dozens of lawyers working full time for many months (still not quite enough to reach a million dollars) just to defend a frivolous lawsuit? What exactly are they doing? Where is all this man power going? Are there really that many avenues of copyright law to explore? Is it really that hard to just say "here's what the law says, here are a few precedents, this is clearly frivolous, period"? Really, millions of dollars?!
I'm not criticising, I just honestly don't understand where all the money goes.
The images don't have to line up. They only have to cover a reasonable overlap. It's the job of panorama software to work out how to stitch them together, and they do a good job.
I tried it, and straight lines relatively close to the camera (a few meters) were warped badly. Edges and objects were often duplicated, torn and/or warped. It only becomes acceptable a bit further out. So if you let the phone rotate on a table, you are guaranteed to get artifacts around the edges of the table and any objects on it. But for an actual "panorama" (far away), it works really well.
The iPhone 6 will have multiple vibrators precisely for that purpose. It will be able to stand up from a horizontal position and jump onto your bed to wake you up. Except after switching from/to DST of course. Also, new apps will pit iPhones against each other, trying to push each other off the table. Expect extra addons with hammers and circular saws, too.
Slashdot Mirror
This kind of advice is what gets so many blond girls pregnant.
More plant growth all over the planet!
Too bad they missed the "low dose" part of the article. Texans...
Namely "safety issues" ,
seems like forever since we've had to worry about batteries exploding
Tell that to Boeing
A hate group that deliberately confuses people? Sounds like the Vatican allright.
All she needs to do is let someone add all the other members of parliament to the same group, then demand that House Rules be enforced on them too. Actually, instead of just this one group, there's probably hundreds of objectionable groups you could add them to.
If they don't have FaceBook accounts, just make new accounts in their names. Surely they are responsible if someone made a FaceBook account in their name and then added them to the group?
Trust me, for every one stupid thing Canadians do, there are like 100,000 stupid thing that Floridians do. Exaggeration...
You must be from Florida?
The DEA had no idea how to access iMessages but now Techdirt just told them how to do it. Your iMessages are no longer safe...
An extra capacitor could probably take care of that. Capacitors are quite good at keeping a large charge for a relatively short time. Perfect for start-stop driving. You will lose any leftover charge when you park the car for more than a few minutes, though.
They in no way limit your vision in any significant way, certainly no worse than sunglasses and which pilot isn't usally rockin a set of aviator shades?
I don't know any pilots who wear aviator shades at night
And why do you think it's normal and acceptable that airlines would have to spend shitloads of money to apply expensive coatings to airplane windows just because some idiots like to shine lasers onto them? What's next? Bullet proof windows so people can fire guns at aircraft? Surely, a prohibition on firing guns at aircraft would be overbearing, right?
Except on an ILS Cat. III C automatic landing with no minimum visibility requirement. But only very few airplanes are equipped for those, the vast majority are only approved for landing with some mimimum visibility, even on autopilot. And you still have to be able to leave the runway and taxi to the parking position.
I wish airplane technology was anywhere near that level. Even the most recent planes are still using relatively old but proven technology, they are nowhere near approving the replacement of windows with displays. The resolution would have to be huge, as well, to approximate the level of detail we can see through a window.
Not to mention older airplanes, some of which still use floppy disks to perform updates to the navigation database. Head up displays do exist (as an option, and one that is relatively rarely picked by airlines), but they are a lot more basic than what you are suggesting. It would be impossible to retrofit all existing planes with the kind of system you are describing.
And no matter what, there would have to be a way of quickly stowing those displays in case of a malfunction, so we can look outside through the window again. There's no way an aircraft would be approved for flight if there was no way of flying visually if everything else fails. Sure, it can all be solved, but I don't see it happening in the near future.
IOS does, through the NSCache interface. You can allocate as much as you like, and the OS will automatically get rid of it if it needs to. Also, your app can respond to low memory warnings so it can free up memory before being forced to quit completely.
Who is this message being sent to exactly?
Anyone reading slashdot? That should catch a sizeable chunk of laser enthousiasts...
But I do agree that 30 months for someone who probably did not know what he was doing, may be a bit harsh.
I know of at least one pilot who got permanent eye damage after a laser strike, and who can no longer fly. The beam becomes pretty wide at that distance but is still strong enough to cause serious damage.
I would bet that the pilot would have plenty of time to see the dot and grab the protection after he sees it, are there even any documented cases of a pilot being blinded by a laser? How many compared to reports of beams on aircraft? (also of note, passengers being blinded, while not life threatening to the whole plane, is still bad and unconscionable)
I have flown with colleagues who have been hit by a laser and who were blinded for a few minutes, having to transfer control to the other pilot but fortunately without permanent eye damage. It's a very sudden flash without warning. Laser light is very focused, so you don't see any "dot" until it's pointed directly at you.
Even worse, I have heard of at least one pilot who has actually lost his license due to permanent eye damage after a laser strike. What a fun game, isn't it?
Taking precautions against them, especially small, cheap precautions (like door locks and protective glasses) which are effective against some of the more common problems, makes sense....
If only there was a way of keeping laser light out and letting other light in so the pilots can still see the runway at night... Yes, even with all the modern electronic guidance systems, being able to look outside is still one of the very basic safety features of any aircraft.
And what exactly is the "practical solution" for keeping laser light out of windows which are designed to give pilots the best possible view outside? Any new materials I don't know of that keep laser light out but let other light through so pilots can still see the ground at night?
I don't think it's "overbearing" to make it illegal to shine lasers at aircraft.
I do think the punishment is a bit harsh for a 19 year old first offender who probably had no idea that what he was doing was so dangerous.
And as for helium balloons being safe... Nah, too easy, I'm not even going to go there.
I meant hydrogen, obviously :-)
Aviation gas is kept isolated from the air? I don't suppose you visit airfields much?
And as for helium balloons being safe... Nah, too easy, I'm not even going to go there.
Lots of people use dynamic IP addresses. The address you are blocking now, may well belong to a perfectly innocent user tomorrow. You're blocking the wrong people.
But does it really take that much work? Why do you even need such a huge number of lawyers for what appears to be a pretty simple case?
What I don't understand, is why lawsuits in the US have to cost millions of dollars. Where does all the money go? Surely, in the case of a clearly frivolous lawsuit, if you take just one single lawyer with experience in copyright law, and you let him work full time for an entire month (without working on any other cases), he's unlikely to find any new arguments after that. So what would that cost, a lawyer for a month? $10,000? $20,000? We're still far, far away from millions! So what else are they doing? Why do you need whole teams of dozens of lawyers working full time for many months (still not quite enough to reach a million dollars) just to defend a frivolous lawsuit? What exactly are they doing? Where is all this man power going? Are there really that many avenues of copyright law to explore? Is it really that hard to just say "here's what the law says, here are a few precedents, this is clearly frivolous, period"? Really, millions of dollars?!
I'm not criticising, I just honestly don't understand where all the money goes.
The images don't have to line up. They only have to cover a reasonable overlap. It's the job of panorama software to work out how to stitch them together, and they do a good job.
I tried it, and straight lines relatively close to the camera (a few meters) were warped badly. Edges and objects were often duplicated, torn and/or warped. It only becomes acceptable a bit further out. So if you let the phone rotate on a table, you are guaranteed to get artifacts around the edges of the table and any objects on it. But for an actual "panorama" (far away), it works really well.
or vagina.
You just need one for each ear.
The iPhone 6 will have multiple vibrators precisely for that purpose. It will be able to stand up from a horizontal position and jump onto your bed to wake you up. Except after switching from/to DST of course. Also, new apps will pit iPhones against each other, trying to push each other off the table. Expect extra addons with hammers and circular saws, too.