Surveillance by its definition is to watch without interacting. Tapping property with a device differentiates this. You can't "bug" a house with a listening device, but by this argument, bugging your phone would be acceptable.
Surveillance is not equal to tracking. Tracking is an invasion of privacy, and when your constitution says, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..." this means that when someone attaches something to your property, they overstep their bounds.
Let's say that instead of a small device, imagine the technology was such that they couldn't hide it. Would it be used? No. They don't want you to know they're doing it. When the police act in secrecy, the only protection citizens have is that an impartial jurist must weigh the facts and decide whether to issue a warrant or not.
Without that type of check, right now, there's no reason YOUR car can't be tagged. Or all of our cars. Police do not have that right, do they?
It begs the question; if police can do something without a warrant, would it be ok if they did it to a thousand people? To you? Your mom? Your kid? And when do they start using this for tax-raising crimes such as speeding and parking violations? Where does it stop if a warrant isn't needed?
We can't even terraform Earth right. What makes anyone believe that an oxygen-less place like Mars is going to just suddenly sprout weeds? Unless you can turn rust into Miracle-Gro, you're pretty borked.
I am guessing the guy would have had his head asplode had he been to China or India... it would have saved us the trouble.
And yes, valid concerns, but a TERRIBLE way going about showing it.
Given that corporations are rather WELL represented, it's amazing that people have to be taxed 7x more than corporations. Considering that corporations have no limit to their contributions (through party PACs), it's no wonder people are constantly getting rolled.
WTF is so hard about a warrant? I don't get it. The whole purpose of a warrant is permission to surveil, among others. Should it not be REASONABLE to ask a judge for permission to invade your private property? I'm ALL FOR the use of these if you GET A FUCKING WARRANT. Follow the damn Constitution!
If anyone wonders why anyone votes "NO" on bond measures and referendums, this is why. We all want good educations for our youth, but disproportionate allocation and spending like this wreak of corruption and misappropriation.
Other nations leap ahead because they are actually putting real teachers in place, paying them well and firing the bad ones, and supporting students all across their country. Our system is so locally based that there is no way to ever lift up those in a bad tax base. Instead, the rich get rich public schools, and the poor get either terrible facilities or overfunded behemoths with sub-par teachers.
It's really time to eliminate local school districts, and fund states equally. That way, when a state legislature passes more ed money around, it goes to the right places.
You dicks like writing laws ForTheChildren. Here's one for you. Write this law. It's a Federal Offense for any school taking federal dollars to capture images, or otherwise surveil students either 100' outside campus, or in any non-school building. This explicitly makes illegal the surveillance of any minor for any reason within the minor's residence. Schools are only allowed to record students on campus, or on school activities away from campus, and may only do so from school property. Additionally, any item issued to a student may be checked out to a specific student or group, but those objects may not in turn provide any additional information about the student or students who were issued materials. Finally, all devices that could be used for surveillance, including but not limited to, cameras, webcams, audio and video recording devices, RFID tags, or any other monitoring device may not be used to store, transmit, geolocate, or otherwise observe a student.
Any incident shall be punishable by a Class 2 Misdemeanor.
IANAL, but you can C&P, if you can handle it, Senator Typewriter.
I think you draw the line at the danger involved. If you drive over the limit, to me that's the same as firing a gun in the air. You have no control over whether the bullet lands harmlessly or in someone's skull. It's the shot that is dangerous, and there is no need to go easy the first time. First time DUIs kill people the same as 5th time. Like first time murderers kill someone as dead as a serial killer. This doesn't make the first less worthy of this type of punishment. If that interferes with your personal life, so be it. I have no sympathy, and obviously the extreme lengths that you had to go had an effect on you, even though you weren't the culprit. That's how you change societal attitudes.
The references are all to hardware products. What about Gmail's innovation to get 8gigs in a free account? It used to be hard to get 50mb in your attached account. Innovation is not limited to physical products. I love most of apple's stuff, but this is awfully dismissive. It's an assessment of goals based on a narrow definition.
I don't care who speaks what, and I really do understand H-1B's are a hot mess. But that debate belongs somewhere else -- that's my point. Securing the borders and not giving up on Arizona is the right thing to do, and adding any discussion of visas is totally disingenuous. This is about ILLEGAL entry, and unless he was talking about making 14 million H-1B's available for free, he's not addressing the problem.
I wish Schumer lived in a southern border state. Dipshit.
WTF does this have to do with stopping illegal Latin Americans from crossing our southern border? ZERO. "Mexican Border Security Bill", huh. This is how we got in this fucking mess. Leave it to a guy whose state borders Canada...
University Rule #1 - the University is a BUSINESS - treat it as such.
The main problem is that the university system is built on requiring 75% of your classload to be non-major courses. If you went back, and only had to take your pre-reqs, and your major classes, you'd probably take only 48h and be done in two years. That only benefits the student. Schools aren't interested in churning out grads quickly. Schools, in general, want students to pay money, period. This keeps universities open for business. Remember NAU doing that RFID on kids for attendance?
"Secure File Sharing - Using our "Temporary URLs" feature, you can ahare any file on your SwissDisk without giving access to your whole filesystem. You can designate how many days the Temporary URL can be used. You can even track how many times files have been downloaded."
If they tell you to ahare stuff, I'm not sure I'd trust them. Miss one keystroke and your data is vapor. You better be better than that.
When you're done with that, whichever program or setup you choose, get a good password. Do something you remember well, like your name. Then use the key to the upper-right of that key... so if your name was Jacque Strappe, you drop the space, and it's iwf284e65w--4 or something like that. Cool? Now go hide your blackmail stuff on a key. Use AES. If you have a mac, use knox.
"I have personal stuff in Outlook folders that I would not want someone in IT to see..." Stored AT your IT department. As 100 people here have said, solve that problem first.
Zero-fatality cars are simple. You need to have them move no faster than 22km/h. That makes the greatest collision 44km/h, and that is not dissimilar to a collision between athletes.
That said, the overall goal is not ridiculous. More people died in the 20th century of car accidents than by war.
OK, I'll bite. What other form of tax implementation is fairer than money spent? If you suggest it's money received, you put the responsibility of reporting on the receiver. If you put it on sales, it's on the merchant. Last I checked, everyone tries to hide income... they can't hide purchases as easily.
Had it augmented my email, I'd probably have looked closer. Instead, it tried to replace it. I have too much invested in my email addresses to supplant them simply. Most people do, too.
A regressive tax is a tax imposed in such a manner that the tax rate decreases as the amount subject to taxation increases.[1][2][3][4][5] "Regressive" describes a distribution effect on income or expenditure, referring to the way the rate progresses from high to low, where the average tax rate exceeds the marginal tax rate.[6][7] In terms of individual income and wealth, a regressive tax imposes a greater burden (relative to resources) on the poor than on the rich — there is an inverse relationship between the tax rate and the taxpayer's ability to pay as measured by assets, consumption, or income.
It can be applied to individual taxes or to a tax system as a whole; a year, multi-year, or lifetime. Regressive taxes attempt to reduce the tax incidence of people with higher ability-to-pay, as they shift the incidence disproportionately to those with lower ability-to-pay. The opposite of a regressive tax is a progressive tax, where the marginal tax rate increases as the amount subject to taxation increases.[8][9][10][11] In between is a flat or proportional tax, where the tax rate is fixed as the amount subject to taxation increases.
The term is frequently applied in reference to fixed taxes, where every person has to pay the same amount of money. The regressivity of a particular tax often depends on the propensity of the tax payers to engage in the taxed activity relative to their income. In other words, if the activity being taxed is more likely to be carried out by the poor and less likely to be carried out by the rich, then the tax may be considered regressive. To determine whether a tax is regressive, the income-elasticity of the good being taxed as well as the income-substitution effect must be considered.
So, dude, whatever. Here's the deal. You spend money, you pay one rate of tax, equal to all the other people of a governed area. That sounds fair to me.
It's not regressive. It's even for all. You want to tell me our current system isn't in fact regressive? You pay tax on what you buy, whether it's a widget or a yacht. Why is that bad?
It's pretty amazing that they are going through some very similar issues, thinking they can engineer around things in a way only America had the audacity to try "back then".
Slashdot Mirror
Surveillance by its definition is to watch without interacting. Tapping property with a device differentiates this. You can't "bug" a house with a listening device, but by this argument, bugging your phone would be acceptable. Surveillance is not equal to tracking. Tracking is an invasion of privacy, and when your constitution says, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..." this means that when someone attaches something to your property, they overstep their bounds. Let's say that instead of a small device, imagine the technology was such that they couldn't hide it. Would it be used? No. They don't want you to know they're doing it. When the police act in secrecy, the only protection citizens have is that an impartial jurist must weigh the facts and decide whether to issue a warrant or not. Without that type of check, right now, there's no reason YOUR car can't be tagged. Or all of our cars. Police do not have that right, do they? It begs the question; if police can do something without a warrant, would it be ok if they did it to a thousand people? To you? Your mom? Your kid? And when do they start using this for tax-raising crimes such as speeding and parking violations? Where does it stop if a warrant isn't needed?
We can't even terraform Earth right. What makes anyone believe that an oxygen-less place like Mars is going to just suddenly sprout weeds? Unless you can turn rust into Miracle-Gro, you're pretty borked.
I am guessing the guy would have had his head asplode had he been to China or India... it would have saved us the trouble. And yes, valid concerns, but a TERRIBLE way going about showing it.
Given that corporations are rather WELL represented, it's amazing that people have to be taxed 7x more than corporations. Considering that corporations have no limit to their contributions (through party PACs), it's no wonder people are constantly getting rolled.
WTF is so hard about a warrant? I don't get it. The whole purpose of a warrant is permission to surveil, among others. Should it not be REASONABLE to ask a judge for permission to invade your private property? I'm ALL FOR the use of these if you GET A FUCKING WARRANT. Follow the damn Constitution!
I wouldn't mind being able to run Angry Birds HD on my home computer. For 99c, my kids get a great experience kinda thing? Not bad at all.
If anyone wonders why anyone votes "NO" on bond measures and referendums, this is why. We all want good educations for our youth, but disproportionate allocation and spending like this wreak of corruption and misappropriation. Other nations leap ahead because they are actually putting real teachers in place, paying them well and firing the bad ones, and supporting students all across their country. Our system is so locally based that there is no way to ever lift up those in a bad tax base. Instead, the rich get rich public schools, and the poor get either terrible facilities or overfunded behemoths with sub-par teachers. It's really time to eliminate local school districts, and fund states equally. That way, when a state legislature passes more ed money around, it goes to the right places.
You dicks like writing laws ForTheChildren. Here's one for you. Write this law. It's a Federal Offense for any school taking federal dollars to capture images, or otherwise surveil students either 100' outside campus, or in any non-school building. This explicitly makes illegal the surveillance of any minor for any reason within the minor's residence. Schools are only allowed to record students on campus, or on school activities away from campus, and may only do so from school property. Additionally, any item issued to a student may be checked out to a specific student or group, but those objects may not in turn provide any additional information about the student or students who were issued materials. Finally, all devices that could be used for surveillance, including but not limited to, cameras, webcams, audio and video recording devices, RFID tags, or any other monitoring device may not be used to store, transmit, geolocate, or otherwise observe a student. Any incident shall be punishable by a Class 2 Misdemeanor. IANAL, but you can C&P, if you can handle it, Senator Typewriter.
Just like other items, regulators should force ISPs to disclose mean/median if they want to use their "up to" shit.
I think you draw the line at the danger involved. If you drive over the limit, to me that's the same as firing a gun in the air. You have no control over whether the bullet lands harmlessly or in someone's skull. It's the shot that is dangerous, and there is no need to go easy the first time. First time DUIs kill people the same as 5th time. Like first time murderers kill someone as dead as a serial killer. This doesn't make the first less worthy of this type of punishment. If that interferes with your personal life, so be it. I have no sympathy, and obviously the extreme lengths that you had to go had an effect on you, even though you weren't the culprit. That's how you change societal attitudes.
The references are all to hardware products. What about Gmail's innovation to get 8gigs in a free account? It used to be hard to get 50mb in your attached account. Innovation is not limited to physical products. I love most of apple's stuff, but this is awfully dismissive. It's an assessment of goals based on a narrow definition.
I don't care who speaks what, and I really do understand H-1B's are a hot mess. But that debate belongs somewhere else -- that's my point. Securing the borders and not giving up on Arizona is the right thing to do, and adding any discussion of visas is totally disingenuous. This is about ILLEGAL entry, and unless he was talking about making 14 million H-1B's available for free, he's not addressing the problem. I wish Schumer lived in a southern border state. Dipshit.
WTF does this have to do with stopping illegal Latin Americans from crossing our southern border? ZERO. "Mexican Border Security Bill", huh. This is how we got in this fucking mess. Leave it to a guy whose state borders Canada...
Um, he's not at MSFT anymore...
University Rule #1 - the University is a BUSINESS - treat it as such. The main problem is that the university system is built on requiring 75% of your classload to be non-major courses. If you went back, and only had to take your pre-reqs, and your major classes, you'd probably take only 48h and be done in two years. That only benefits the student. Schools aren't interested in churning out grads quickly. Schools, in general, want students to pay money, period. This keeps universities open for business. Remember NAU doing that RFID on kids for attendance?
"Secure File Sharing - Using our "Temporary URLs" feature, you can ahare any file on your SwissDisk without giving access to your whole filesystem. You can designate how many days the Temporary URL can be used. You can even track how many times files have been downloaded." If they tell you to ahare stuff, I'm not sure I'd trust them. Miss one keystroke and your data is vapor. You better be better than that.
When you're done with that, whichever program or setup you choose, get a good password. Do something you remember well, like your name. Then use the key to the upper-right of that key... so if your name was Jacque Strappe, you drop the space, and it's iwf284e65w--4 or something like that. Cool? Now go hide your blackmail stuff on a key. Use AES. If you have a mac, use knox.
"I have personal stuff in Outlook folders that I would not want someone in IT to see..." Stored AT your IT department. As 100 people here have said, solve that problem first.
Zero-fatality cars are simple. You need to have them move no faster than 22km/h. That makes the greatest collision 44km/h, and that is not dissimilar to a collision between athletes. That said, the overall goal is not ridiculous. More people died in the 20th century of car accidents than by war.
OK, I'll bite. What other form of tax implementation is fairer than money spent? If you suggest it's money received, you put the responsibility of reporting on the receiver. If you put it on sales, it's on the merchant. Last I checked, everyone tries to hide income... they can't hide purchases as easily.
Had it augmented my email, I'd probably have looked closer. Instead, it tried to replace it. I have too much invested in my email addresses to supplant them simply. Most people do, too.
A regressive tax is a tax imposed in such a manner that the tax rate decreases as the amount subject to taxation increases.[1][2][3][4][5] "Regressive" describes a distribution effect on income or expenditure, referring to the way the rate progresses from high to low, where the average tax rate exceeds the marginal tax rate.[6][7] In terms of individual income and wealth, a regressive tax imposes a greater burden (relative to resources) on the poor than on the rich — there is an inverse relationship between the tax rate and the taxpayer's ability to pay as measured by assets, consumption, or income. It can be applied to individual taxes or to a tax system as a whole; a year, multi-year, or lifetime. Regressive taxes attempt to reduce the tax incidence of people with higher ability-to-pay, as they shift the incidence disproportionately to those with lower ability-to-pay. The opposite of a regressive tax is a progressive tax, where the marginal tax rate increases as the amount subject to taxation increases.[8][9][10][11] In between is a flat or proportional tax, where the tax rate is fixed as the amount subject to taxation increases. The term is frequently applied in reference to fixed taxes, where every person has to pay the same amount of money. The regressivity of a particular tax often depends on the propensity of the tax payers to engage in the taxed activity relative to their income. In other words, if the activity being taxed is more likely to be carried out by the poor and less likely to be carried out by the rich, then the tax may be considered regressive. To determine whether a tax is regressive, the income-elasticity of the good being taxed as well as the income-substitution effect must be considered.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_tax
So, dude, whatever. Here's the deal. You spend money, you pay one rate of tax, equal to all the other people of a governed area. That sounds fair to me.
It's not regressive. It's even for all. You want to tell me our current system isn't in fact regressive? You pay tax on what you buy, whether it's a widget or a yacht. Why is that bad?
It's pretty amazing that they are going through some very similar issues, thinking they can engineer around things in a way only America had the audacity to try "back then".
Slashdot, when you said "turn off ads," I didn't think you were prankin' me...