HBO gets $x per month for every subscriber who subscribes to it via cable/satellite/etc.
If HBO offered an a-la-carte offering (basically the current HBO go streaming offering but available to anyone and not just those who subscribe to HBO) and charged $y for it (where $y is higher than $x) they could make MORE money than they do right now. Anyone who switched from HBO-via-cable to HBO-a-la-carte would be an increase in revenue. As would anyone who doesn't currently get HBO but who takes up the a-la-carte offering. They would however lose revenue from anyone who currently has HBO but chooses to drop it completly but this would probably be a relatively small number of people I suspect.
Anyone out there know more about the business than me and can explain why HBO doesn't do this? (offer its product a-la-carte at a price that is higher than what it gets from cable companies, thus ensuring that it doesn't lose revenue when a customer switches from HBO-via-cable to HBO a-la-carte)
You can now get access to HBO-Go through an Amazon prime account, a well.
I don't know how the channels are over in the States but in the UK, there are an awful lot of +1 and even +2 (timeshifted channels) - are they classifying these as individual channels? I'd say nearly every channel has one of these... you could cut the channel list by 40% if they had counted these.
Some channels do have east and west (3 hour timeshifted) channels. Not very many show up in my channel list, and I have access to around 200. Of course there are duplicates as far as HD and non HD. For some reason you still have to pay extra for HD channels here.
First, when this guys talk about x americans, they are extrapolating from a few families they are studying. My family was a couple of decades ago a study "family". All of the families chosen where from friends of friends, which meant the majority would be of a certain background and economic group. Besides, we often left the TV on or inputed that a certain member of the family was watching when none was, just to look good in the stats and continue to be part of the program. We werent the only ones.
Hmm I was part of their research group for a while. Didn't know anyone else that was being studied. So if they stick only to friends of friends I do not know how I ended up on their list. And yeah I cheated on my stats to make sure my favorite shows didn't get cancelled.;)
Reality is that the supply of ESPN and crappy channel are both unlimited once the channel is 'added' to the network, so the a la carte price is what the market will bear -- ie what is highest price they can charge for it where charging more will lose them more subscribers than the extra revenue will cover.
For a channel like ESPN, they can raise the price pretty high and lots of people will continue to pony up to keep getting it. For a channel like "gameshow reruns from the 70s"... not so much so it will be much much lower.
Perhaps that is true, but ESPN will remain on the air and the channel that the GP wants to watch will likely go the way of the dodo. You can DVR or stream most broadcast tv and people won't care. I refuse to watch a sporting event if I start the event after its already been concluded. I'd rather just watch the highlights at that point. I know that there are people who do DVR sports, but most people want to watch the action live. If I could pay for Al La Carte, I would likely only get 3 or 4 channels total and let the rest come over the air.
Here in America, we have it much easier. The NSA does all that recordkeeping for us.
The NSA is doing all that record keeping for Russia also. They've just decided its cheaper to do in house than to outsource that labor to an NSA mole. That's the real reason behind this law.
Between NASA/CNES being correct and Elon Musk being correct, I'll side with Elon. He's already created the first practical electric car which besides having 200+ mile range is freaking awesome and sporty. Behemoth GM failed to do the same over the course of decades. So proving NASA/CNES wrong, the smart money is on Elon.
You're right. There were no geniuses working at NASA or CNES. They were doomed for failure. Elon will save the day.
No doubt that SpaceX has put a whole lot of effort into making this work, but it amazes me that people who are otherwise knowledgeable about this kind of stuff can't stand looking at actual results rather than assuming this is just random musings. One of the ways SpaceX knows how many potential launches they can get out of their engines is because they have put some of these Merlin-1 engines on their test stand in Texas and have fired them for full mission duration burns 40-50 times. SpaceX definitely doesn't make up these numbers out of their hind end but rather from experience and actually using this equipment.
Again reality sort of bites these guys hard because SpaceX has been able to bring the 1st stage down to a soft landing. With the most recent launch, SpaceX was denied the opportunity to do more because both the FAA and the USAF folks at Cape Canaveral didn't really want that return stage going anywhere near the launch pad until SpaceX has proven they have control of the vehicle. Regardless, SpaceX has done the really hard part of actually getting the spacecraft to return in a recoverable condition.... something these "experts" in this article are denying is even possible in a theoretical sense.
The 2nd stage recovery is going to be a whole lot harder, and it is something that even SpaceX themselves have said may not be successful. Still, I wouldn't categorically write off SpaceX either and it is just stupid to dismiss something like this as impossible without even making an attempt to see if it could be done.
Okay but where do they land these engines after they've launched them? Over land? Or over the occean? Because salt water will wreak havoc on the internal plumbing of an engine. So unless they take the risk of dropping the engine module onto someone's house, they are going to need to land in the ocean and refurbish the engine just to use it again. I really don't blame the FAA or USAF for preventing them from returning the engine core to the Cape. Elon Musk probably doesn't have the bucks to repair the facility if he drops that engine through the roof of the wrong building. I will be really surprised if they get FAA approval to do this anywhere but perhaps New Mexico's deserts.
Be helpful, I remember one time I was filtering down the centre line on a motorbike (dispatch rider) past stationary traffic and a taxi driver stuck his hand out. I braked and a pushchair popped out from between the stationary traffic. Without that warning I could have killed a toddler as it was no harm was done and I don't think the mother was ever aware of the danger.
And this is why lane stradling is illegal in most of the places I have driven! Traffic gave way to somebody and you, while being the pushy arrogant asshole and overtaking illegally as you advocate against, were nearly the cause of a fatality on the road.
*rolls eyes* If everyone else follows you're advice you won't have to. Is that what you are thinking?
It's not illegal in the UK, and in many places. In fact, on an interstate I would much rather be moving slowly between traffic than stopped behind traffic. My jurisdiction does not allow lane splitting. Do you know how many oblivious assholes try to run me over on a daily basis? I intentionally position myself in the lane so that they should be able to see me. Instead, all they see is that there is an empty spot between two cars that they can fill with their car. I find that I am far less likely to be run over if I am going 5-10mph faster than traffic around me versus cruising in slow moving traffic next to some moron who isn't paying any attention. I typically have to avoid an idiot once every 1-2 miles if I am stuck going with the flow of traffic. And by avoid an idiot, I mean lane split with them anyway because they don't see me, don't respect me honking my horn, and I find myself riding next to them in the same lane as me.
No it doesn't. Give me a couple hundred dollars and I'll run down to radioshack and get enough parts to make you an always-on, fire proof, self charging GPS transponder that phones in its location every few minutes. Self-contained, inside an insulated box with 10 year batteries and you could glue it anywhere on the plane not accessible to passengers or crew while in flight. Make it charge via induction and viola, it's not even part of the planes induction system. Hell, you could do the entire thing with Arduino parts. I had to check to make sure they had a 2-way satellite link but sure enough they do. My creation would weigh under a pound and be extremely cheap... if I actually etched my own boards and what-not I could get it smaller than a cellphone. This is a very simple problem to solve.
(ok, radioshack doesn't have shit anymore... in reality I'd go to mouser)
Again the true costs of such a project revolve around the time and money it would take to get the transponder FAA certified, satellite up-link time, and the cost of retrofitting the device onto existing aircraft. Like I said, they could have had tracking on this aircraft from Boeing for something on the order of $15,000 per aircraft per year. The airline opted out. Granted that tracking service is mostly for maintenance purposes, but it would have given us the lat/long of the aircraft on a regular interval right up until the point the device stopped being powered.
I'm not saying I consider it to be a problem. I grew up working on cars. I am just saying that is how it is considered. It seems to me that you should be able to keep anything you want on your property, so long as it is not a public safety hazard. But there are plenty of people who disagree. My parents live in an older home that was constructed long before the days of HOA's, too.
Ahhh, so you're saying it's legal for MD to automatically scan license plates, cross-check them with FL's published list of CCW permit holders, and make a traffic stop *solely* based on that info? That's what happened here, and that's a clear violation of the 4th Amendment.
Florida does not publish its list of permit holders, and indeed does not even notify state law enforcement that a person holds a permit without a warrant. See Section 790.0601, F.S.
RTFA. The guy had no gun in the car (he'd left it locked up in FL), but the MD cops knew he had a CCW permit even though he was a FL resident . . . how is that possible?
States sharing this information is nothing new. If you get pulled over and have an outstanding warrant from most any other state, the cops will know about that, too.
Except that it is illegal for FL law enforcement to even know that you have a concealed weapons permit without a warrant. In fact, the law was specifically written to prevent the information from being shared either with law enforcement or even in civil court without a proper warrant. For civil matters the warrant must coincide with a restraining order or an expert witness declaring that you are of an unsound mind or mentally unstable (see Section 790.0601, F.S.).
Don't do this in California. They will tow your car right out of your driveway if they can see from the street that it does not have a license plate.
Wow, and I thought NY was a fascist state. What CA law justifies that? Around here, a car on private property needn't have any license plates, registration, or any such thing. If it's not on a public road it's not the government's business. I, and many people I know, have taken a junker to be fixed up or something, and only registered it, etc., after that was done. The only problem is neighbors who don't respect my cultural heritage as white trash. Do you think I should sue them on civil rights violations?
Vehicle registration laws in California require you to keep a car registered. If they can't see the tag, the assumption is that it is not registered. The fee for having a car that is Non-Op is (or at least was) very nominal. Just a few dollars per year. Most cities consider cars without tags to be a nuisance, and will tow them. If its in the garage, or if you're in a non-incorporated area, they usually don't really care.
Is it legal to hide your tag while on private property? What about privately owned, but publicly accessible property? I assume that it's legal to own a street-legal car even if it doesn't have tags, as long as its not driven on public streets. Therefore, I should be able to park my car in my driveway, hide the tag, and it would be perfectly legal. Can I do this in parking garages, or lots? If I park my car in the lot outside a shopping mall, and hide the tag, is that still legal? If it's legal, then what do you think is the likelihood that it will get towed?
Don't do this in California. They will tow your car right out of your driveway if they can see from the street that it does not have a license plate. It happened to my parents once, and it took a lot of legal wrangling to get the car back without paying insane fees and fines.
Can you blame people for seeking alternative answers? Keep in mind, the agencies discrediting this company were the same agencies that didn't think it necessary to put a simple satellite GPS transponder on jets to keep track of where their quarter of a billion dollar plane is or put about $100 worth of batteries in their blackbox so it would ping for more than a few weeks. This entire mystery wouldn't exist if they'd spent an extra $1000 on a $261 million dollar piece of equipment. It's hard to discredit an idiot when you yourself are an idiot.
Extra batteries would increase the size and weight of the blackbox. The design costs, testing costs, and fuel costs of transporting a larger box would likely far exceed $1000 for every plane produced. I'm not saying you're being unreasonable, just that you are underestimating the costs involved. The 777 had all of the equipment it needed to report its location to a satellite on a regular basis. Older planes may not have all that equipment, however.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you receive something addressed to you that was sent by accident, you are under no obligation to return it and it legally belongs to you. I'm pretty sure this is US Postal Law.
IANAL so anyone more familiar with this, feel free to chime in. But AFAIK the parts now legally belong to the kid.
Go ahead and try that with the federal government and see where that gets you! Not to mention the law covers mail that is addressed to you. IT was to prevent people from sending you "gifts" and trying to invoice you for that item later. It wasn't addressed to him. He shouldn't have even opened it to begin with.
automous navigation features cost you less than $500 for a fully working system controller including required accelerometers, gyros, GPS, compass and a short range telemetry system (only short range due to low output power).
Just stop right there and think about it. NOAA and the USG are not hobbyists. Perhaps this platform does leverage open source but they probably need FAA certified equipment so that they can fly above the limits placed on hobbyists. Not to mention the potential liability to the government if they rolled out a $1000 drone and it crashed and killed someone. If they tried to explain that one away then some enterprise would leverage that to say that the USG should have dropped $2M on a predator (whatever its price is). They aren't doing this as a hobby. Maybe the $300+k comes from the sensor package also? Just because you can do something similar out of your garage doesn't mean that is what the government should be doing.
I'm all for cutting out pork, but you have not revealed any pork so far.
You know what worked better for me then longhand notes? No notes. Listening to the teacher instead of writing worked best for me. Turns out I recalled things better when I spent my attention listening to the teacher rather then trying to write legible notes so I could read then later.
Just goes to show that people learn differently and making blanket statements for all people gets you into trouble:)
Min
Doodling usually worked best for me. If I am not doing something with my hands then my mind starts moving onto other things and I completely lose track of the lecture. Though I will say that I found the laptop to be quite nice. I could type notes fast enough that I could almost do a word for word transcription of the teacher's lecture. I didn't do that. I would listen, and "doodle" on the trackpad (just move the mouse cursor in circles) and then quickly type what important bit I wanted to remember from the lecture. This never worked in math or science classes, however.
That's because no amount of creative pricing and sexy marketing (random musing: CZJ was way better than pink motorcycle lady with annoying voice) can hide the fact that T-Mobile has a 1990s network in 2014. Seriously, it's pathetic unless you live in a major city, and even then you'll have to deal with inferior indoor coverage as compared to carriers with 850mhz licenses.
Here in Upstate NY your options as soon as you leave the city limits range from EDGE to "roaming on AT&T" (if T-Mo allows it where you're at, they don't in all areas) to "no service at all". I experimented with T-Mobile back in 2007-2008 when I couldn't afford to pay Verizon's premium prices and had to deal with zero coverage for the last ten minutes of my thirty minute daily commute. They've not really improved all that much since then, at least if their coverage maps are any indication.
The analogy that I've long used is that Verizon is the hottest girl at the prom, and worse, she knows it.
You're behind the times. When the AT&T / T-Mo merger failed, AT&T gave T-mo a bunch of spectrum. The service is way better now than it has ever been. I have LTE/4G coverage all over the place, including many rural areas. It is very rare for me to have only Edge or no service. Not to mention the fact that you now get free data / texting in most international companies. Perhaps it's different in NY State, but I have been using their service on both the Eastern Seaboard and in California with no problem.
But not the shitty Hypercom terminals you find in a large fraction of independent retailers.
I am not involved in the sales end of their setup, but I do know that it works with European chip and pin cards. Some of the proof of concepts I put together are to market the terminals to banks. The low end readers are like $200. The units I play with are dev units, and do not communicate with a processing service. It's side work for me, so I don't know a lot of the details of how their product works once you tie it in to the processing. They sell the exact same units to the rest of the world, though. Are these Hypercom terminals even less than $200?
My wife has a retail store and a credit card reader.
If I wandered into the bank and asked how I get a C&P terminal for the store, they would stare at me blankly. It simply isn't available. The terminals exist, but the bank isn't going to talk to it until they're good an ready to, which at the current rate of progress is 'never'.
Target has more leverage, but small retailers have to take what the bank makes available.
For this and other reasons, we will probably switch banks, but people should be under the impression that retailers in the Us can 'just switch'. They can't. The bank decides which terminals it will work with. This is bizarre given that the terminals are completely generic.
Then you're dealing with the wrong vendor. I can tell you right now that I sometimes work on proof of concept applications for one of the largest POS terminal makers in the US and all of their hardware comes with chip and pin support. Even the lowest end equipment. It's available in the US. In fact, the last time I went into the T-Mobile store, all of the terminals inside the store supported chip and pin.
So you'd rather have them careening down the freeway at 80MPH with one hand on the wheel and one hand holding their smartphone while looking down at it to see why the call just got cut off?
and when they crash into someone else, no one can call for an ambulance?
If only they were careening down the freeway at 80MPH while talking on their cell phone. Instead, they are in the left hand lane vacillating between 55 and 90MPH without even realizing it, all the while preventing anyone from getting around them by hovering in the blind spots of the cars on their right, then speeding up when someone finally has a chance to pass them for a change.
In the feared case of gas leak explosion, the entire street becomes unlivable. Houses next door will be destroyed. Houses further out will be shifted off their foundations and fire departments will not let anyone enter. All the houses in the neighborhood will have broken windows.
I don't know about you, but I think I have at least a few friends who would let me show up randomly after work and sleep on their couch if my place had just been destroyed in an explosion. So it doesn't have to be a neighbor either!
You post, in short:
"OH LORDY I'M TOO SCARED TO ACTUAL READ THE ARTICLE!"
I mean, come on. Yes, it's important enough that you need important info, but when it's handed to you don't you think you should read it instead of looking foolish?
This is Slashdot. Who actually reads the article? Besides, my point wasn't that I was scared that something would go terribly wrong with this. I am just saying I've lived in those South American countries and sometimes shortcuts are taken. If what they are doing is safe and reasonably studied, then I think they should do it. The person's post was basically saying that we, in the first world, have no right to judge them for what they do to save lives. I am trying to make the point that every country in the globe is connected. If something does go wrong, it can spread to the first world. And in fact dengue itself has already spread to the United States. So inaction on the parts of these countries could increase the chance of it spreading further into the US. My whole point is that this guy is no better than the people he is deriding. That caution should be displayed when releasing non-native insects (in this case, genetically modified mosquitoes). As long as Brazil and its researchers have done due diligence, then go for it. And no, its really not all that important to me, in the long run. It would likely take generations for any sort of side effect to work its way the thousands of miles to North America - unless the side effect is the eradication of the mosquitoes, then we'd likely do it here.
Slashdot Mirror
HBO gets $x per month for every subscriber who subscribes to it via cable/satellite/etc.
If HBO offered an a-la-carte offering (basically the current HBO go streaming offering but available to anyone and not just those who subscribe to HBO) and charged $y for it (where $y is higher than $x) they could make MORE money than they do right now. Anyone who switched from HBO-via-cable to HBO-a-la-carte would be an increase in revenue. As would anyone who doesn't currently get HBO but who takes up the a-la-carte offering. They would however lose revenue from anyone who currently has HBO but chooses to drop it completly but this would probably be a relatively small number of people I suspect.
Anyone out there know more about the business than me and can explain why HBO doesn't do this? (offer its product a-la-carte at a price that is higher than what it gets from cable companies, thus ensuring that it doesn't lose revenue when a customer switches from HBO-via-cable to HBO a-la-carte)
You can now get access to HBO-Go through an Amazon prime account, a well.
I don't know how the channels are over in the States but in the UK, there are an awful lot of +1 and even +2 (timeshifted channels) - are they classifying these as individual channels? I'd say nearly every channel has one of these ... you could cut the channel list by 40% if they had counted these.
Some channels do have east and west (3 hour timeshifted) channels. Not very many show up in my channel list, and I have access to around 200. Of course there are duplicates as far as HD and non HD. For some reason you still have to pay extra for HD channels here.
First, when this guys talk about x americans, they are extrapolating from a few families they are studying. My family was a couple of decades ago a study "family". All of the families chosen where from friends of friends, which meant the majority would be of a certain background and economic group. Besides, we often left the TV on or inputed that a certain member of the family was watching when none was, just to look good in the stats and continue to be part of the program. We werent the only ones.
Hmm I was part of their research group for a while. Didn't know anyone else that was being studied. So if they stick only to friends of friends I do not know how I ended up on their list. And yeah I cheated on my stats to make sure my favorite shows didn't get cancelled. ;)
That is an overly simplistic analysis.
Reality is that the supply of ESPN and crappy channel are both unlimited once the channel is 'added' to the network, so the a la carte price is what the market will bear -- ie what is highest price they can charge for it where charging more will lose them more subscribers than the extra revenue will cover.
For a channel like ESPN, they can raise the price pretty high and lots of people will continue to pony up to keep getting it. For a channel like "gameshow reruns from the 70s"... not so much so it will be much much lower.
Perhaps that is true, but ESPN will remain on the air and the channel that the GP wants to watch will likely go the way of the dodo. You can DVR or stream most broadcast tv and people won't care. I refuse to watch a sporting event if I start the event after its already been concluded. I'd rather just watch the highlights at that point. I know that there are people who do DVR sports, but most people want to watch the action live. If I could pay for Al La Carte, I would likely only get 3 or 4 channels total and let the rest come over the air.
Here in America, we have it much easier. The NSA does all that recordkeeping for us.
The NSA is doing all that record keeping for Russia also. They've just decided its cheaper to do in house than to outsource that labor to an NSA mole. That's the real reason behind this law.
Between NASA/CNES being correct and Elon Musk being correct, I'll side with Elon. He's already created the first practical electric car which besides having 200+ mile range is freaking awesome and sporty. Behemoth GM failed to do the same over the course of decades. So proving NASA/CNES wrong, the smart money is on Elon.
You're right. There were no geniuses working at NASA or CNES. They were doomed for failure. Elon will save the day.
No doubt that SpaceX has put a whole lot of effort into making this work, but it amazes me that people who are otherwise knowledgeable about this kind of stuff can't stand looking at actual results rather than assuming this is just random musings. One of the ways SpaceX knows how many potential launches they can get out of their engines is because they have put some of these Merlin-1 engines on their test stand in Texas and have fired them for full mission duration burns 40-50 times. SpaceX definitely doesn't make up these numbers out of their hind end but rather from experience and actually using this equipment.
Again reality sort of bites these guys hard because SpaceX has been able to bring the 1st stage down to a soft landing. With the most recent launch, SpaceX was denied the opportunity to do more because both the FAA and the USAF folks at Cape Canaveral didn't really want that return stage going anywhere near the launch pad until SpaceX has proven they have control of the vehicle. Regardless, SpaceX has done the really hard part of actually getting the spacecraft to return in a recoverable condition.... something these "experts" in this article are denying is even possible in a theoretical sense.
The 2nd stage recovery is going to be a whole lot harder, and it is something that even SpaceX themselves have said may not be successful. Still, I wouldn't categorically write off SpaceX either and it is just stupid to dismiss something like this as impossible without even making an attempt to see if it could be done.
Okay but where do they land these engines after they've launched them? Over land? Or over the occean? Because salt water will wreak havoc on the internal plumbing of an engine. So unless they take the risk of dropping the engine module onto someone's house, they are going to need to land in the ocean and refurbish the engine just to use it again. I really don't blame the FAA or USAF for preventing them from returning the engine core to the Cape. Elon Musk probably doesn't have the bucks to repair the facility if he drops that engine through the roof of the wrong building. I will be really surprised if they get FAA approval to do this anywhere but perhaps New Mexico's deserts.
Be helpful, I remember one time I was filtering down the centre line on a motorbike (dispatch rider) past stationary traffic and a taxi driver stuck his hand out. I braked and a pushchair popped out from between the stationary traffic. Without that warning I could have killed a toddler as it was no harm was done and I don't think the mother was ever aware of the danger.
And this is why lane stradling is illegal in most of the places I have driven! Traffic gave way to somebody and you, while being the pushy arrogant asshole and overtaking illegally as you advocate against, were nearly the cause of a fatality on the road.
*rolls eyes* If everyone else follows you're advice you won't have to. Is that what you are thinking?
It's not illegal in the UK, and in many places. In fact, on an interstate I would much rather be moving slowly between traffic than stopped behind traffic. My jurisdiction does not allow lane splitting. Do you know how many oblivious assholes try to run me over on a daily basis? I intentionally position myself in the lane so that they should be able to see me. Instead, all they see is that there is an empty spot between two cars that they can fill with their car. I find that I am far less likely to be run over if I am going 5-10mph faster than traffic around me versus cruising in slow moving traffic next to some moron who isn't paying any attention. I typically have to avoid an idiot once every 1-2 miles if I am stuck going with the flow of traffic. And by avoid an idiot, I mean lane split with them anyway because they don't see me, don't respect me honking my horn, and I find myself riding next to them in the same lane as me.
No it doesn't. Give me a couple hundred dollars and I'll run down to radioshack and get enough parts to make you an always-on, fire proof, self charging GPS transponder that phones in its location every few minutes. Self-contained, inside an insulated box with 10 year batteries and you could glue it anywhere on the plane not accessible to passengers or crew while in flight. Make it charge via induction and viola, it's not even part of the planes induction system. Hell, you could do the entire thing with Arduino parts. I had to check to make sure they had a 2-way satellite link but sure enough they do. My creation would weigh under a pound and be extremely cheap... if I actually etched my own boards and what-not I could get it smaller than a cellphone. This is a very simple problem to solve.
(ok, radioshack doesn't have shit anymore... in reality I'd go to mouser)
Again the true costs of such a project revolve around the time and money it would take to get the transponder FAA certified, satellite up-link time, and the cost of retrofitting the device onto existing aircraft. Like I said, they could have had tracking on this aircraft from Boeing for something on the order of $15,000 per aircraft per year. The airline opted out. Granted that tracking service is mostly for maintenance purposes, but it would have given us the lat/long of the aircraft on a regular interval right up until the point the device stopped being powered.
I'm not saying I consider it to be a problem. I grew up working on cars. I am just saying that is how it is considered. It seems to me that you should be able to keep anything you want on your property, so long as it is not a public safety hazard. But there are plenty of people who disagree. My parents live in an older home that was constructed long before the days of HOA's, too.
Ahhh, so you're saying it's legal for MD to automatically scan license plates, cross-check them with FL's published list of CCW permit holders, and make a traffic stop *solely* based on that info? That's what happened here, and that's a clear violation of the 4th Amendment.
Florida does not publish its list of permit holders, and indeed does not even notify state law enforcement that a person holds a permit without a warrant. See Section 790.0601, F.S.
RTFA. The guy had no gun in the car (he'd left it locked up in FL), but the MD cops knew he had a CCW permit even though he was a FL resident . . . how is that possible?
States sharing this information is nothing new. If you get pulled over and have an outstanding warrant from most any other state, the cops will know about that, too.
Except that it is illegal for FL law enforcement to even know that you have a concealed weapons permit without a warrant. In fact, the law was specifically written to prevent the information from being shared either with law enforcement or even in civil court without a proper warrant. For civil matters the warrant must coincide with a restraining order or an expert witness declaring that you are of an unsound mind or mentally unstable (see Section 790.0601, F.S.).
Don't do this in California. They will tow your car right out of your driveway if they can see from the street that it does not have a license plate.
Wow, and I thought NY was a fascist state. What CA law justifies that? Around here, a car on private property needn't have any license plates, registration, or any such thing. If it's not on a public road it's not the government's business. I, and many people I know, have taken a junker to be fixed up or something, and only registered it, etc., after that was done. The only problem is neighbors who don't respect my cultural heritage as white trash. Do you think I should sue them on civil rights violations?
Vehicle registration laws in California require you to keep a car registered. If they can't see the tag, the assumption is that it is not registered. The fee for having a car that is Non-Op is (or at least was) very nominal. Just a few dollars per year. Most cities consider cars without tags to be a nuisance, and will tow them. If its in the garage, or if you're in a non-incorporated area, they usually don't really care.
Is it legal to hide your tag while on private property? What about privately owned, but publicly accessible property? I assume that it's legal to own a street-legal car even if it doesn't have tags, as long as its not driven on public streets. Therefore, I should be able to park my car in my driveway, hide the tag, and it would be perfectly legal. Can I do this in parking garages, or lots? If I park my car in the lot outside a shopping mall, and hide the tag, is that still legal? If it's legal, then what do you think is the likelihood that it will get towed?
Don't do this in California. They will tow your car right out of your driveway if they can see from the street that it does not have a license plate. It happened to my parents once, and it took a lot of legal wrangling to get the car back without paying insane fees and fines.
Can you blame people for seeking alternative answers? Keep in mind, the agencies discrediting this company were the same agencies that didn't think it necessary to put a simple satellite GPS transponder on jets to keep track of where their quarter of a billion dollar plane is or put about $100 worth of batteries in their blackbox so it would ping for more than a few weeks. This entire mystery wouldn't exist if they'd spent an extra $1000 on a $261 million dollar piece of equipment. It's hard to discredit an idiot when you yourself are an idiot.
Extra batteries would increase the size and weight of the blackbox. The design costs, testing costs, and fuel costs of transporting a larger box would likely far exceed $1000 for every plane produced. I'm not saying you're being unreasonable, just that you are underestimating the costs involved. The 777 had all of the equipment it needed to report its location to a satellite on a regular basis. Older planes may not have all that equipment, however.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you receive something addressed to you that was sent by accident, you are under no obligation to return it and it legally belongs to you. I'm pretty sure this is US Postal Law.
IANAL so anyone more familiar with this, feel free to chime in. But AFAIK the parts now legally belong to the kid.
Go ahead and try that with the federal government and see where that gets you! Not to mention the law covers mail that is addressed to you. IT was to prevent people from sending you "gifts" and trying to invoice you for that item later. It wasn't addressed to him. He shouldn't have even opened it to begin with.
automous navigation features cost you less than $500 for a fully working system controller including required accelerometers, gyros, GPS, compass and a short range telemetry system (only short range due to low output power).
Just stop right there and think about it. NOAA and the USG are not hobbyists. Perhaps this platform does leverage open source but they probably need FAA certified equipment so that they can fly above the limits placed on hobbyists. Not to mention the potential liability to the government if they rolled out a $1000 drone and it crashed and killed someone. If they tried to explain that one away then some enterprise would leverage that to say that the USG should have dropped $2M on a predator (whatever its price is). They aren't doing this as a hobby. Maybe the $300+k comes from the sensor package also? Just because you can do something similar out of your garage doesn't mean that is what the government should be doing.
I'm all for cutting out pork, but you have not revealed any pork so far.
You know what worked better for me then longhand notes? No notes. Listening to the teacher instead of writing worked best for me. Turns out I recalled things better when I spent my attention listening to the teacher rather then trying to write legible notes so I could read then later.
Just goes to show that people learn differently and making blanket statements for all people gets you into trouble :)
Min
Doodling usually worked best for me. If I am not doing something with my hands then my mind starts moving onto other things and I completely lose track of the lecture. Though I will say that I found the laptop to be quite nice. I could type notes fast enough that I could almost do a word for word transcription of the teacher's lecture. I didn't do that. I would listen, and "doodle" on the trackpad (just move the mouse cursor in circles) and then quickly type what important bit I wanted to remember from the lecture. This never worked in math or science classes, however.
I meant countries not companies. Forgive the reply to self.
That's because no amount of creative pricing and sexy marketing (random musing: CZJ was way better than pink motorcycle lady with annoying voice) can hide the fact that T-Mobile has a 1990s network in 2014. Seriously, it's pathetic unless you live in a major city, and even then you'll have to deal with inferior indoor coverage as compared to carriers with 850mhz licenses.
Here in Upstate NY your options as soon as you leave the city limits range from EDGE to "roaming on AT&T" (if T-Mo allows it where you're at, they don't in all areas) to "no service at all". I experimented with T-Mobile back in 2007-2008 when I couldn't afford to pay Verizon's premium prices and had to deal with zero coverage for the last ten minutes of my thirty minute daily commute. They've not really improved all that much since then, at least if their coverage maps are any indication.
The analogy that I've long used is that Verizon is the hottest girl at the prom, and worse, she knows it.
You're behind the times. When the AT&T / T-Mo merger failed, AT&T gave T-mo a bunch of spectrum. The service is way better now than it has ever been. I have LTE/4G coverage all over the place, including many rural areas. It is very rare for me to have only Edge or no service. Not to mention the fact that you now get free data / texting in most international companies. Perhaps it's different in NY State, but I have been using their service on both the Eastern Seaboard and in California with no problem.
But not the shitty Hypercom terminals you find in a large fraction of independent retailers.
I am not involved in the sales end of their setup, but I do know that it works with European chip and pin cards. Some of the proof of concepts I put together are to market the terminals to banks. The low end readers are like $200. The units I play with are dev units, and do not communicate with a processing service. It's side work for me, so I don't know a lot of the details of how their product works once you tie it in to the processing. They sell the exact same units to the rest of the world, though. Are these Hypercom terminals even less than $200?
My wife has a retail store and a credit card reader.
If I wandered into the bank and asked how I get a C&P terminal for the store, they would stare at me blankly. It simply isn't available. The terminals exist, but the bank isn't going to talk to it until they're good an ready to, which at the current rate of progress is 'never'.
Target has more leverage, but small retailers have to take what the bank makes available.
For this and other reasons, we will probably switch banks, but people should be under the impression that retailers in the Us can 'just switch'. They can't. The bank decides which terminals it will work with. This is bizarre given that the terminals are completely generic.
Then you're dealing with the wrong vendor. I can tell you right now that I sometimes work on proof of concept applications for one of the largest POS terminal makers in the US and all of their hardware comes with chip and pin support. Even the lowest end equipment. It's available in the US. In fact, the last time I went into the T-Mobile store, all of the terminals inside the store supported chip and pin.
So you'd rather have them careening down the freeway at 80MPH with one hand on the wheel and one hand holding their smartphone while looking down at it to see why the call just got cut off? and when they crash into someone else, no one can call for an ambulance?
If only they were careening down the freeway at 80MPH while talking on their cell phone. Instead, they are in the left hand lane vacillating between 55 and 90MPH without even realizing it, all the while preventing anyone from getting around them by hovering in the blind spots of the cars on their right, then speeding up when someone finally has a chance to pass them for a change.
In the feared case of gas leak explosion, the entire street becomes unlivable. Houses next door will be destroyed. Houses further out will be shifted off their foundations and fire departments will not let anyone enter. All the houses in the neighborhood will have broken windows.
I don't know about you, but I think I have at least a few friends who would let me show up randomly after work and sleep on their couch if my place had just been destroyed in an explosion. So it doesn't have to be a neighbor either!
You post, in short: "OH LORDY I'M TOO SCARED TO ACTUAL READ THE ARTICLE!" I mean, come on. Yes, it's important enough that you need important info, but when it's handed to you don't you think you should read it instead of looking foolish?
This is Slashdot. Who actually reads the article? Besides, my point wasn't that I was scared that something would go terribly wrong with this. I am just saying I've lived in those South American countries and sometimes shortcuts are taken. If what they are doing is safe and reasonably studied, then I think they should do it. The person's post was basically saying that we, in the first world, have no right to judge them for what they do to save lives. I am trying to make the point that every country in the globe is connected. If something does go wrong, it can spread to the first world. And in fact dengue itself has already spread to the United States. So inaction on the parts of these countries could increase the chance of it spreading further into the US. My whole point is that this guy is no better than the people he is deriding. That caution should be displayed when releasing non-native insects (in this case, genetically modified mosquitoes). As long as Brazil and its researchers have done due diligence, then go for it. And no, its really not all that important to me, in the long run. It would likely take generations for any sort of side effect to work its way the thousands of miles to North America - unless the side effect is the eradication of the mosquitoes, then we'd likely do it here.