I could piss the basic event with my bow on a *bad* day.
Sweet! I assume that, since you're more skilled than everyone else, that you'll be competing in the next olympics? I look forward to hearing about your gold medal!
Regardless of how you want to argue semantics, what the officer did was against policy, and it was against policy for a reason. What happened in this situation is the reason - because it could kill or do serious harm to somebody, especially if they have certain medical conditions. The existence of the policy proves that the officer should reasonably have known that this move could have killed somebody, therefore he is guilty of negligent homicide.
The politicians who are TWC customers found out that Comcast was giving away VIP support bypass cards but TWC wasn't, so they're retaliating. Temporarily, of course, until TWC promises to give them cards after the merger.
You just gotta figure no matter who loses, Humanity wins.
Unfortunately, in this case, both sides win. Does that mean humanity loses? North Korea gets to flex its muscles and show that it has the ability to censor the US for awhile. Sony had a movie that was going to flop, but now they just need to hold on to it for a little while before releasing it and they'll rake in the millions.
Consumers who believe they were wrongly charged will be able to apply for refunds at a website set up for the purpose.
So pretty much T-Mobile could have made hundreds of millions of dollars off of this, but they won't have to pay more than $67.5 million of it unless people realize they were being overcharged, and go to the trouble of applying for a refund. How many people will actually do that? Most people who were wrongfully charged probably don't even realize, especially when it's tucked in between the various ridiculous "fee" line items on the bill. And even if people do realize they are being wrongfully charged, and even if they do know where to go to apply for a refund, unless it's a significant amount most won't bother because either they'll "get around to it later" or figure the slim chance of actually collecting isn't worth their time and hassle.
There should have been a few more million added to hire a team of forensic accountants.
Or when I pull up in my driveway and see that someone is already inside my home or garage, I should just let them finish stealing whatever they'd like and file a report.
Well, yeah, actually. In this case, you'd have to be really stupid to try to have a gun battle with them (assuming in your scenario that most people carry a gun, so presumably the intruder has a high probability of having a gun). Even if you think you have the skill to shoot your average criminal before they can shoot you, you don't know the skill level of this particular intruder. Even if you are more skilled than the intruder, let's say you have a 75% chance of winning the fight (50% if the intruder is equally skilled, which you don't know going into the fight). Is not losing your stuff worth a 25% chance of losing your life? Voluntarily avoiding that confrontation doesn't mean you're a wussy, it means you're smart.
Anyway, point being, it doesn't matter how much of a badass you are, voluntarily going into a gun fight by yourself just to protect some stuff is really fucking stupid. Unless you're Chuck Norris, but I doubt Chuck Norris would post as Anonymous Coward.
Verizon believes major demand for its new encryption service will come from governmental agencies conveying sensitive but unclassified information over the phone, says Tim Petsky, a senior product manager for Verizon Wireless.
Sensitive, but unclassified. That should give an indication as to the level of security they expect it to provide.
Phone carriers like Verizon are required by U.S. law to build networks that can be wiretapped. But the legislation known as the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act requires phone carriers to decrypt communications for the government only if they have designed their technology to make it possible to do so. If Verizon and Cellcrypt had structured their encryption so that neither company had the information necessary to decrypt the calls, they would not have been breaking the law.
If you think you're defending against the NSA with encryption provided by a big telecom company, you're fooling yourself, even if this policy weren't public. If, on the other hand, you're defending against basic hackers hired by a competitor, then perhaps this would be a reasonable option. It's like locking your doors, putting bars on all your windows, and putting your stuff in a safe. Sure, that'll keep most burglars out, but do you think the NSA wouldn't be able to get to your stuff?
This is the part that bugs me: "so long as they're able to prove that there's a legitimate law enforcement reason for doing so." It used to be that meant demonstrating to an impartial judge that they had probable cause, which takes the form of a warrant. However, it doesn't say they need a warrant...so now it's a Verizon employee rather than an impartial judge who gets to decide if there's probable cause.
Those things are not necessarily true. It really depends on if they gave campaign contributions to the right people, in the right amounts, at the right time. Or were you under the impression that separation of powers in the branches of government still exists? Judgeships are political appointments. All Sony really needs is for a politician to pressure the judge to issue an injunction that lasts long enough for the news to go stale.
It has no impact on how much they can spend at lunch or whether they get the premium cable package or the standard.
Right, I'm sure they have to budget their lunches very carefully. I'm sure they have to make decisions about which days they have to bring lunch from home and how many days they can afford to eat out. I'm sure it's also a huge decision about whether to splurge for the premium cable package, or save money and get standard cable so they can afford a few more days of eating off the dollar menu.
They'd have to sell or take out loans against their shares if they wanted to go buy a Private Jet or something like that.
Oh. My. God. You mean they can't just order another private jet online, they actually have to fill out some paperwork? Scratch that, they actually have to sign the paperwork that their lawyers filled out for them? I feel so sorry for them! They have it so rough compared to their employees, whose entire wealth can be had as cash in an instant simply by digging through the couch cushions.
But he seems to have gone for the republican kool aid and somehow wants to blame this on.... the executive branch.
Yes, it is the executive branch's fault. Of course, it is also the legislative and judicial branch's fault, but even if Obama tried unsuccessfully to kill the bill, and even if SCOTUS won't hear it for procedural reasons, Obama could still prevent it. It does authorize but does not require the executive branch to conduct warrantless forfeiture of private communications. Obama could simply say, "that's unconstitutional, we're not gong to do that," and order federal agencies to only seize or intercept private communications if they have a warrant.
I'm going to be working in high tech in Miami for the next year. What activities would you suggest to continue developing my ice climbing skills?
Running, biking/spinning, swimming, and lifting weights. You'll want to stay in shape and work on strength training, so that when you return to ice climbing you're ready to (pardon the pun) hit the ground running.
This may be the end of Philae’s short and trailblazing mission on the surface of Comet 67P, but a huge amount of data — including data from a drilling operation that, apparently, was carried out despite concerns that Philae wasn’t positioned correctly — was streamed to Rosetta mission control, potentially revolutionizing our understanding about the nature of comets.
And Rosetta will continue orbiting its comet as 67P drops closer to the sun, providing us with a unique and historic perspective on an icy body that could hold the secrets to the formation of our solar system.
I'm sorry, where does it say that the mission was a failure?
Sadly, most people learn this little gem of wisdom too late in life. Cheating only harms the cheater. It may mildly harm those who employ these people, but it doesn't take long for others to see despite your piece of paper, you're just an idiot who knows nothing, when you cheat.
It also harms non-cheaters with a degree from the same University. If CompanyA has hired a couple people from the CS program at UniversityB, and they happened to be cheaters and incompetent despite their degree, and I apply for the same job with a legit CS degree from the same University, it's going to hurt my chances of getting the job. And while you might say that the company should catch it in an interview, depending on the nature of the company and the job they might not know the right questions to ask since many of the cheaters are excellent bullshitters and get past the interview but are utterly unable to perform the work competently. Probably not coincidentally, out of quite a few cheaters I encountered in my CS program only one of them wasn't from India.
Slashdot Mirror
I could piss the basic event with my bow on a *bad* day.
Sweet! I assume that, since you're more skilled than everyone else, that you'll be competing in the next olympics? I look forward to hearing about your gold medal!
Regardless of how you want to argue semantics, what the officer did was against policy, and it was against policy for a reason. What happened in this situation is the reason - because it could kill or do serious harm to somebody, especially if they have certain medical conditions. The existence of the policy proves that the officer should reasonably have known that this move could have killed somebody, therefore he is guilty of negligent homicide.
The politicians who are TWC customers found out that Comcast was giving away VIP support bypass cards but TWC wasn't, so they're retaliating. Temporarily, of course, until TWC promises to give them cards after the merger.
You just gotta figure no matter who loses, Humanity wins.
Unfortunately, in this case, both sides win. Does that mean humanity loses? North Korea gets to flex its muscles and show that it has the ability to censor the US for awhile. Sony had a movie that was going to flop, but now they just need to hold on to it for a little while before releasing it and they'll rake in the millions.
Consumers who believe they were wrongly charged will be able to apply for refunds at a website set up for the purpose.
So pretty much T-Mobile could have made hundreds of millions of dollars off of this, but they won't have to pay more than $67.5 million of it unless people realize they were being overcharged, and go to the trouble of applying for a refund. How many people will actually do that? Most people who were wrongfully charged probably don't even realize, especially when it's tucked in between the various ridiculous "fee" line items on the bill. And even if people do realize they are being wrongfully charged, and even if they do know where to go to apply for a refund, unless it's a significant amount most won't bother because either they'll "get around to it later" or figure the slim chance of actually collecting isn't worth their time and hassle.
There should have been a few more million added to hire a team of forensic accountants.
The NSA is just as guilty of ignoring the 2nd amendment
Hmmmm, the NSA is certainly guilty of ignoring the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th, not so sure about the 2nd.
Or when I pull up in my driveway and see that someone is already inside my home or garage, I should just let them finish stealing whatever they'd like and file a report.
Well, yeah, actually. In this case, you'd have to be really stupid to try to have a gun battle with them (assuming in your scenario that most people carry a gun, so presumably the intruder has a high probability of having a gun). Even if you think you have the skill to shoot your average criminal before they can shoot you, you don't know the skill level of this particular intruder. Even if you are more skilled than the intruder, let's say you have a 75% chance of winning the fight (50% if the intruder is equally skilled, which you don't know going into the fight). Is not losing your stuff worth a 25% chance of losing your life? Voluntarily avoiding that confrontation doesn't mean you're a wussy, it means you're smart.
Anyway, point being, it doesn't matter how much of a badass you are, voluntarily going into a gun fight by yourself just to protect some stuff is really fucking stupid. Unless you're Chuck Norris, but I doubt Chuck Norris would post as Anonymous Coward.
Where would you have them test prototypes?
How about an unpopulated (or minimally populated) area? Maybe even do something useful for its test like tracking wildlife instead of humans?
There have been a total of two attempted prosecutions under provisions in the Patriot Act
And how many NSLs have been issued to force the cover-up of these constitutional violations?
Also, FTA:
Verizon believes major demand for its new encryption service will come from governmental agencies conveying sensitive but unclassified information over the phone, says Tim Petsky, a senior product manager for Verizon Wireless.
Sensitive, but unclassified. That should give an indication as to the level of security they expect it to provide.
FTA:
Phone carriers like Verizon are required by U.S. law to build networks that can be wiretapped. But the legislation known as the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act requires phone carriers to decrypt communications for the government only if they have designed their technology to make it possible to do so. If Verizon and Cellcrypt had structured their encryption so that neither company had the information necessary to decrypt the calls, they would not have been breaking the law.
If you think you're defending against the NSA with encryption provided by a big telecom company, you're fooling yourself, even if this policy weren't public. If, on the other hand, you're defending against basic hackers hired by a competitor, then perhaps this would be a reasonable option. It's like locking your doors, putting bars on all your windows, and putting your stuff in a safe. Sure, that'll keep most burglars out, but do you think the NSA wouldn't be able to get to your stuff?
This is the part that bugs me: "so long as they're able to prove that there's a legitimate law enforcement reason for doing so." It used to be that meant demonstrating to an impartial judge that they had probable cause, which takes the form of a warrant. However, it doesn't say they need a warrant...so now it's a Verizon employee rather than an impartial judge who gets to decide if there's probable cause.
Those things are not necessarily true. It really depends on if they gave campaign contributions to the right people, in the right amounts, at the right time. Or were you under the impression that separation of powers in the branches of government still exists? Judgeships are political appointments. All Sony really needs is for a politician to pressure the judge to issue an injunction that lasts long enough for the news to go stale.
Deport the lot and erect barriers around their enclaves. Ready the nukes and just carpet bomb the fuck out of them. Enough is enough.
Wasn't there some dude in Germany some decades ago who tried something similar with an entire religion's people? How'd that work out for him?
you'll find that in western countries 8-25%(sometimes more) support the use of violence to do so
Versus the 51% in the US who support violence by Christians? (as shown by those who voted for Bush's 2nd term)
I'm skeptical of the peaceful nature of a religion founded by a warlord
Are you referring to Catholicism, which was founded by Constantine?
It has no impact on how much they can spend at lunch or whether they get the premium cable package or the standard.
Right, I'm sure they have to budget their lunches very carefully. I'm sure they have to make decisions about which days they have to bring lunch from home and how many days they can afford to eat out. I'm sure it's also a huge decision about whether to splurge for the premium cable package, or save money and get standard cable so they can afford a few more days of eating off the dollar menu.
They'd have to sell or take out loans against their shares if they wanted to go buy a Private Jet or something like that.
Oh. My. God. You mean they can't just order another private jet online, they actually have to fill out some paperwork? Scratch that, they actually have to sign the paperwork that their lawyers filled out for them? I feel so sorry for them! They have it so rough compared to their employees, whose entire wealth can be had as cash in an instant simply by digging through the couch cushions.
But he seems to have gone for the republican kool aid and somehow wants to blame this on.... the executive branch.
Yes, it is the executive branch's fault. Of course, it is also the legislative and judicial branch's fault, but even if Obama tried unsuccessfully to kill the bill, and even if SCOTUS won't hear it for procedural reasons, Obama could still prevent it. It does authorize but does not require the executive branch to conduct warrantless forfeiture of private communications. Obama could simply say, "that's unconstitutional, we're not gong to do that," and order federal agencies to only seize or intercept private communications if they have a warrant.
Judge: Mr. Prosecutor, can you please tell me where you obtained this evidence?
Mr. Prosecutor: National Security.
Judge: Oh, Okay.
FTFY
those rules would involve an expensive physical buildout and/or sharing profits with a lot of middlemen.
That sounds like a good explanation of why the rules are fundamentally flawed.
I guess you can call it illegal, but that sort of implies that there is some sort of authority who can take authority action against transgressors.
There is an authority who can take action, the problem is that they don't. It's pretty much the reason the Supreme Court exists.
Why should we believe that HTTPS (or i suppose more accurately TLS / SSL) hasn't already been compromised (i.e. by the NSA)?
So, the straw man you're referring to is the idea that if the NSA can break it, then it's useless?
I'm going to be working in high tech in Miami for the next year. What activities would you suggest to continue developing my ice climbing skills?
Running, biking/spinning, swimming, and lifting weights. You'll want to stay in shape and work on strength training, so that when you return to ice climbing you're ready to (pardon the pun) hit the ground running.
This may be the end of Philae’s short and trailblazing mission on the surface of Comet 67P, but a huge amount of data — including data from a drilling operation that, apparently, was carried out despite concerns that Philae wasn’t positioned correctly — was streamed to Rosetta mission control, potentially revolutionizing our understanding about the nature of comets.
And Rosetta will continue orbiting its comet as 67P drops closer to the sun, providing us with a unique and historic perspective on an icy body that could hold the secrets to the formation of our solar system.
I'm sorry, where does it say that the mission was a failure?
Sadly, most people learn this little gem of wisdom too late in life. Cheating only harms the cheater. It may mildly harm those who employ these people, but it doesn't take long for others to see despite your piece of paper, you're just an idiot who knows nothing, when you cheat.
It also harms non-cheaters with a degree from the same University. If CompanyA has hired a couple people from the CS program at UniversityB, and they happened to be cheaters and incompetent despite their degree, and I apply for the same job with a legit CS degree from the same University, it's going to hurt my chances of getting the job. And while you might say that the company should catch it in an interview, depending on the nature of the company and the job they might not know the right questions to ask since many of the cheaters are excellent bullshitters and get past the interview but are utterly unable to perform the work competently. Probably not coincidentally, out of quite a few cheaters I encountered in my CS program only one of them wasn't from India.