Nobody is coming into your home and forcing you to submit to an airport security screening. You have the option not to fly. Even if you chose to fly, you do have the option not to pass through full body scanners and the right to refuse strip searches.
Sick of this bullshit argument.
First of all, if you don't submit to a strip search, you get groped by a thug. Reeeeal fine choice there.
Second, they don't force you to drive either. They don't force you to work. They don't force you to live where you do. Does that give them to right to execute invasive searches for no reason whatsoever? No, it does not. Just because you technically choose to do it means absolute squat.
Nobody is coming into your home and forcing you to submit to an airport security screening. You have the option not to fly. Even if you chose to fly, you do have the option not to pass through full body scanners and the right to refuse strip searches.
Tired of hearing this bullshit argument. First of all, you get a pat-down if you don't pass through the body scanners. So you choose between a strip search or a groping. That's a false choice. That's like saying it's reasonable for a mugger to give you a choice of getting knifed in an arm or a leg because you chose to pass by his alley.
Second, they aren't forcing you to drive either. It doesn't give them the right to search your vehicle for no reason. The same concept could be applied to your home. Or your work place. Or anything else you technically "choose" to do.
Don't be so ridiculous.
OK, I hate frivolous lawsuits, but I'd sue the department in this case, and not necessarily for monetary gains. I'd rather see the people who decided it'd be a good idea to make this an issue be forced to leave without their precious pension. It has to be made clear to the cops that they are not immune to consequences.
Ridiculous.
How about setting the precedent that the government can?
First it will be FCC's "Net neutrality", then it will be a mandatory proprietary iCHIP for parental controls in every ethernet adapter.
Based on what information? This sounds an awful lot like the "information" Glenn Beck is spewing. Just in case that is where you get your "facts," you should know that when Glenn Beck did his show about Net Neutrality, everything that he described as being part of Net Neutrality actually has nothing to do with it. He didn't cover what it actually is, he just listed a bunch of "Marxist" stuff and falsely claimed that that's what Net Neutrality is.
I guess he feels like he can get away with it because it's all stuff that supposedly could happen, if you take the least probable things Beck says at their most far-out extremes as absolute fact.
You know, Glenn Beck's concerns may be a bit exaggerated, but they are legitimate concerns at the core. I don't want government control any more than anyone else. I get what the opponents to net neutrality are saying, and I understand their position (unless it's a batshit crazy off-the-wall side-with-my-party kind of thing).
That being said, since most ISPs have some kind of exclusivity deal with cities, capitalism just doesn't happen, and the consumers have no choice. Since they have no choice, the ISPs can do whatever the hell they want. Therefore, while this is the status quo, net neutrality is our only realistic option to battle the bullshit that many large ISPs spew our way.
Ultimately, the best option would be to illegalize exclusivity deals when it comes to telecommunications (within certain limits, so we don't have 40 cables in our back yard). That way the ISP who offers neutrality would be King. And the competition would force them to do so if there was a market for it (which there is).
Frankly though, email should generally be considered insecure anyway. It's usually transmitted, somewhere along the chain, in plain-text, and you only have (limited) control over your own connection, not the connection of the party you're communicating with. The pseudo-elitists posting here claiming that they're OK because, unlike the great unwashed, they use HTTPS when they connect to their web mail, are fooling themselves.
Well, just checking it can be considered secure, so as to the relevancy of TFA, I would feel fine using HTTPS to check my webmail over a wi-fi connection that I do or do not own. Sending/receiving mail (via webmail) over that same HTTPS connection isn't any less secure than a connection at home either when speaking in context of the actual SMTP transmission. That is, unless you're using your own machine as the mail server for whatever reason.
Not disagreeing, just noting the context in the spirit of TFA.
Couldn't a space ship or probe come by and pick up one of the "small" moonlets and use it for fuel? 12KM of pre-frozen volatile organic matter sounds like a great windfall if you ask me.
Or just feed the astronauts Chipotle and you got the same thing right on board!
I would even go on to guess from there that birds have tough beaks in part because of the hard outer egg shell situation. Soft beak or no beak = tougher time breaking outta that shell.
Actually, our rapid development into sterile societies has backfired because of how we're wired due to evolution. At least that's the theory. Our bodies were built to battle a few parasites, at least in our youth, and the theory is that because we are so sterile anymore, our bodies are looking for something to attack... and since in modern countries the majority of the population is parasite-free, they attack us instead. Behold: autoimmune diseases!
It's actually probably pretty good for us to get at least a little down'n'dirty as kids so our bodies don't go crazy attacking perfectly normal things as unwanted foreign bodies.
In the consumer reports video, I was seeing signal strength numbers drop down in the -105dbm to -108dbm range or worse. That's enough to drop a call. That's a real flaw.
I guess I was thinking more along the lines of just simply checking for activity in that frequency range in the vicinity of the gas pump you are using. If there is, I'd find decent reason to get suspicious, considering the range of such a signal. I can't imagine there's a ton of signals hovering around gas pumps.
That's exactly what I was thinking. Tons of people have at least 2 vehicles. And for those that have more, they'll probably be trickle charging 24/7 if they have one that isn't used as much. Even at the figure they stated, that's at least 10-15 plasmas running all night long. That's a HUGE energy load there.
It looks like Comcast is trying to make the tradition "boxless cable option" disappear.
I say: the city should push back on this. If nothing else, there should be a boxless cable
option for any TV that can tune into digital signals with a built in tuner. A special cable
box should simply not be required.
There should be some cable package that can be used without a box.
Basic cable from Comcast should be tunable with an HDHR or a naked HDTV.
Should be, and you will probably tune in a good number of them, but encrypting channels is a common practice and your TV won't be able to decrypt it. It's a dick move by cable co.'s everywhere in the name of "piracy prevention".
I don't know where you vote, but my ballots frequently have more than two candidates on them, in addition to a write in option. You are perfectly free to choose as you please. The government is as accountable as we make it, and not one iota more. All this whining is just an attempt to shed personal responsibility.
Or it's just realistic. You can vote, technically, for whoever you want. But when the media and 99% of everyone else is touting a choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich, the dumb masses of the public:
a) won't vote for someone else in an organized effort
b) think voting with "their" party is still the best option (even though their views might be wildly different), or
c) have no idea what the other options are
Realistically, you'd have to have more than a 2-party system in order to pull anything off. That means including more parties in official debates, getting some media exposure (they are currently largely ignored), etc. No exposure = no chance, and right now the media and the existing 2 major parties control the exposure, and thus the chance of anything different happening.
It's not so black and white, and it's not about shedding personal responsibility. It's about what the current situation is.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody is coming into your home and forcing you to submit to an airport security screening. You have the option not to fly. Even if you chose to fly, you do have the option not to pass through full body scanners and the right to refuse strip searches.
Sick of this bullshit argument.
First of all, if you don't submit to a strip search, you get groped by a thug. Reeeeal fine choice there.
Second, they don't force you to drive either. They don't force you to work. They don't force you to live where you do. Does that give them to right to execute invasive searches for no reason whatsoever? No, it does not. Just because you technically choose to do it means absolute squat.
Don't be so ridiculous.
Nobody is coming into your home and forcing you to submit to an airport security screening. You have the option not to fly. Even if you chose to fly, you do have the option not to pass through full body scanners and the right to refuse strip searches.
Tired of hearing this bullshit argument. First of all, you get a pat-down if you don't pass through the body scanners. So you choose between a strip search or a groping. That's a false choice. That's like saying it's reasonable for a mugger to give you a choice of getting knifed in an arm or a leg because you chose to pass by his alley.
Second, they aren't forcing you to drive either. It doesn't give them the right to search your vehicle for no reason. The same concept could be applied to your home. Or your work place. Or anything else you technically "choose" to do.
Don't be so ridiculous.
... that boss might be smart enough...
Isn't that a bit of an oxymoron?
*ducks*
The tea party was organized pre-Obama.
OK, I hate frivolous lawsuits, but I'd sue the department in this case, and not necessarily for monetary gains. I'd rather see the people who decided it'd be a good idea to make this an issue be forced to leave without their precious pension. It has to be made clear to the cops that they are not immune to consequences.
Ridiculous.
Ra damn it!
How about setting the precedent that the government can? First it will be FCC's "Net neutrality", then it will be a mandatory proprietary iCHIP for parental controls in every ethernet adapter.
Based on what information? This sounds an awful lot like the "information" Glenn Beck is spewing. Just in case that is where you get your "facts," you should know that when Glenn Beck did his show about Net Neutrality, everything that he described as being part of Net Neutrality actually has nothing to do with it. He didn't cover what it actually is, he just listed a bunch of "Marxist" stuff and falsely claimed that that's what Net Neutrality is. I guess he feels like he can get away with it because it's all stuff that supposedly could happen, if you take the least probable things Beck says at their most far-out extremes as absolute fact.
You know, Glenn Beck's concerns may be a bit exaggerated, but they are legitimate concerns at the core. I don't want government control any more than anyone else. I get what the opponents to net neutrality are saying, and I understand their position (unless it's a batshit crazy off-the-wall side-with-my-party kind of thing).
That being said, since most ISPs have some kind of exclusivity deal with cities, capitalism just doesn't happen, and the consumers have no choice. Since they have no choice, the ISPs can do whatever the hell they want. Therefore, while this is the status quo, net neutrality is our only realistic option to battle the bullshit that many large ISPs spew our way.
Ultimately, the best option would be to illegalize exclusivity deals when it comes to telecommunications (within certain limits, so we don't have 40 cables in our back yard). That way the ISP who offers neutrality would be King. And the competition would force them to do so if there was a market for it (which there is).
Frankly though, email should generally be considered insecure anyway. It's usually transmitted, somewhere along the chain, in plain-text, and you only have (limited) control over your own connection, not the connection of the party you're communicating with. The pseudo-elitists posting here claiming that they're OK because, unlike the great unwashed, they use HTTPS when they connect to their web mail, are fooling themselves.
Well, just checking it can be considered secure, so as to the relevancy of TFA, I would feel fine using HTTPS to check my webmail over a wi-fi connection that I do or do not own. Sending/receiving mail (via webmail) over that same HTTPS connection isn't any less secure than a connection at home either when speaking in context of the actual SMTP transmission. That is, unless you're using your own machine as the mail server for whatever reason.
Not disagreeing, just noting the context in the spirit of TFA.
Couldn't a space ship or probe come by and pick up one of the "small" moonlets and use it for fuel? 12KM of pre-frozen volatile organic matter sounds like a great windfall if you ask me.
Or just feed the astronauts Chipotle and you got the same thing right on board!
Apart from not using all my memory, what can Chrome do that Firefox can't?
Load pages really, really, really fast.
In my opinion, he's the best the show has seen. That's a shame that he feels it's beneath him to stay beyond 2 seasons.
You're hired!
Case in point: Apple.
Parent is hardly trolling. It's a well-known fact that Apple's marketing is so impressive they could sell piles of donkey shit to Warren Buffet.
I would even go on to guess from there that birds have tough beaks in part because of the hard outer egg shell situation. Soft beak or no beak = tougher time breaking outta that shell.
"Yo dawg, I heard ya like being wireless, so we made a wireless bus so you can be wireless while you go wireless."
Actually, our rapid development into sterile societies has backfired because of how we're wired due to evolution. At least that's the theory. Our bodies were built to battle a few parasites, at least in our youth, and the theory is that because we are so sterile anymore, our bodies are looking for something to attack... and since in modern countries the majority of the population is parasite-free, they attack us instead. Behold: autoimmune diseases!
It's actually probably pretty good for us to get at least a little down'n'dirty as kids so our bodies don't go crazy attacking perfectly normal things as unwanted foreign bodies.
In the consumer reports video, I was seeing signal strength numbers drop down in the -105dbm to -108dbm range or worse. That's enough to drop a call. That's a real flaw.
That may be true but most people with a webserver are botnets/open proxies/etc.
Strong generalizations with no citation offers little worth to the discussion at hand.
I guess I was thinking more along the lines of just simply checking for activity in that frequency range in the vicinity of the gas pump you are using. If there is, I'd find decent reason to get suspicious, considering the range of such a signal. I can't imagine there's a ton of signals hovering around gas pumps.
On the bright side, it's easily detectable by checking for BT radios.
That's exactly what I was thinking. Tons of people have at least 2 vehicles. And for those that have more, they'll probably be trickle charging 24/7 if they have one that isn't used as much. Even at the figure they stated, that's at least 10-15 plasmas running all night long. That's a HUGE energy load there.
Define "lowering" taxes. Are you considering the total tax burden, or just personal income tax? Yeah, I thought so.
Also, "lowering" taxes doesn't do any good if you don't cut spending, anyway.
It looks like Comcast is trying to make the tradition "boxless cable option" disappear.
I say: the city should push back on this. If nothing else, there should be a boxless cable option for any TV that can tune into digital signals with a built in tuner. A special cable box should simply not be required.
There should be some cable package that can be used without a box.
Basic cable from Comcast should be tunable with an HDHR or a naked HDTV.
Should be, and you will probably tune in a good number of them, but encrypting channels is a common practice and your TV won't be able to decrypt it. It's a dick move by cable co.'s everywhere in the name of "piracy prevention".
I don't know where you vote, but my ballots frequently have more than two candidates on them, in addition to a write in option. You are perfectly free to choose as you please. The government is as accountable as we make it, and not one iota more. All this whining is just an attempt to shed personal responsibility.
Or it's just realistic. You can vote, technically, for whoever you want. But when the media and 99% of everyone else is touting a choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich, the dumb masses of the public:
a) won't vote for someone else in an organized effort
b) think voting with "their" party is still the best option (even though their views might be wildly different), or
c) have no idea what the other options are
Realistically, you'd have to have more than a 2-party system in order to pull anything off. That means including more parties in official debates, getting some media exposure (they are currently largely ignored), etc. No exposure = no chance, and right now the media and the existing 2 major parties control the exposure, and thus the chance of anything different happening.
It's not so black and white, and it's not about shedding personal responsibility. It's about what the current situation is.
But yes, actions DO speak louder than words.
the days of record labels selling $20 cd's...
FTFY