Only in the Americas do CDMA2000 networks still use MEID for authentication, as far as I know.
Only in the USA, as far as I know... here in Canada, Telus/Bell (and their subsidiaries and hangers-on) are using a WCDMA/HSPA network on 850/1900, and they've switched to SIM cards too. They do still support CDMA devices, as they've sold them, but they don't sell them any more. The only other major players in the country were using GSM with SIM cards all along.
Actually, I think even in the USA, they've changed their tune... Verizon used to be the only holdout, and a quick search of their website shows that you can get a SIM card for their network now. T-Mob was on GSM since the beginning, and you've been able to get a SIM card for ATT for years now.
Just off the top of my head. They were flogging that as a great new feature a year ago. Not that I would ever buy from that particular company, I think they're evil incarnate. But they did offer data sharing a long time ago. Putting it on an "unlimited" data plan is new, but the main reason Rogers doesn't do that is that they don't have unlimited data plans. I imagine that if they did have unlimited data plans in the first place, they'd offer it too... probably for a price that's just as obscenely out to lunch as the one that's discussed in TFA: for what Rogers would charge to share 3GB of data and 200 minutes between two phones, you can get two unlimited everything phones from Wind... unlimited data, unlimited minutes, unlimited texting, and unlimited long distance.
Similarly, I doubt very much that the companies TFA is discussing will be particularly friendly with their pricing....
We do, actually, have *exactly* fios. Just not in Ontario/Quebec (yet). And actually, even that's not entirely true, as Bell has been unrolling their FTTH networks in Quebec and Ontario for a while now... Quebec City, for example, doesn't have any copper at all any more, and most new subdivisions being built near major centres in Ontario and Quebec are FTTH, with no copper at all being sold. Bell is selling up to 150mbit connections with IPTV (not counting against that 150mbit) in some areas, and as I understand it, they're actually installing OC-48 lines. Just not everywhere. The footprint isn't very big at the moment, but it's happening.
Of course, Bell is still years behind Aliant... they've got their FibreOP service available through large parts of the maritimes.
I wonder if this Rogers study was looking at the best possible available from all providers, and saying "see? you can get 150mbit Internet from Bell, we're better than other countries!" without looking at the little asterisk that says it's only available to a few thousand people out of the country's 35 million.
Just so we're clear on how Constitutional law is *supposed* to work: Nothing can legally 'trump' the Constitution or any of the Amendments, save an Amendment itself. All federal legislation that contradicts the Constitution and existing Amendments is, technically, not law./rant
Yup. And the Ninth Amendment deals with unenumerated rights. The right to be free from harassment would be one of those unenumerated rights, and when combined with the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment serves as the basis for why a human rights commission can overrule the First Amendment in human rights cases. And as I said previously, the WA Human Rights Commission holds that unwanted display of pornography is sexual harassment, and falls under the jurisdiction of human rights law.
Depends on who you're comparing it against. I pay $42/mo for 12meg DSL with a 300GB cap, and unmetered usage between 2am and 8am. Compared to the US, that's *really* cheap. Compared to South Korea? You've gotta be kidding me.
That being said, it does depend on where you are. The FTTH service that Aliant sells on the east coast is *way* cheaper than DSL services in Ontario/Quebec. Still, I do have to ask what developed countries the "study" looked at, because anecdotally I know that many developed countries in Europe put Canada to shame.
There are circumstances that trump the first amendment, and human rights law is one of them. The library's wrong here, as is the guy watching the porn. It has nothing to do with whether he decides to whip it out and start pleasuring himself.
If that computer screen is sitting on top of a desk, and is a reasonably large size, and facing an open public space, what makes you think there's any expectation of privacy there? It's not a question of minding your own business, it's a question of public display of pornographic material.
The Washington State Human Rights Commission says, quite plainly that such a display of pornographic material is sexual harassment. The US First Amendment guarantees free speech, yes, but there are numerous cases where it is trumped by another statute. You are not, for example, allowed to walk into a crowded theatre and yell "fire!" Similarly, you can't walk into a public school and start shouting obscenities over the PA system. Human Rights, and specifically to this case Sexual Harassment, are one of these cases. The First Amendment is *not* a carte blanche.
In other words, the library is wrong in this case. They are creating a hostile environment by allowing sexual harassment to continue, and they had better hope they have a *really* good lawyer if this woman decides to take it further.
That's a 5" Mk.45 gun, not a rifle, and it's not a sniper, it's an artillery shot.;) That thing has a range well over 5 miles... more like 13nm according to wiki.:) The navy has guns with an operational range >20mi if you're willing to allow a bigger gun like a 12" or a 16"...
Of course, if you're going to allow the Navy to use big guns as "sniper" weapons, I'm going to allow the Army to use an excalibur round... 200+ mile range on that particular type of artillery.:P
5 miles? That's pushing the limits of physics just a little too much. It would take a shitload of luck to get a hit from that far away. Farthest I've personally seen done is just over a mile (1800m).
And as others have pointed out, it takes time and money to train a sniper. It also takes a *lot* of luck at the upper ends of distance. You have to account for ballistic trajectory, air resistance (which changes with the temperature), wind (which can change directions remarkably easily), moving targets, etc.. Even at the speeds a bullet travels at, it still takes a discernable amount of time to reach the target at that distance. Having something you can fire and forget, and let your spotter guide it to its target with a laser pointer is a huge improvement, IMO. And besides, it's not going to cost a million bucks a pop once it's in production. Development may have cost that, but nothing in the device is all that expensive to actually make.
The guys backing Romney, like Mike Griffin, are lobbyists for the current major aerospace players, like ATK, who don't want change. They have lobbied ruthlessly against any changes to improve NASA, or build a more competitive low-cost commercial launch industry. It's no wonder they are backing Romney. He will do what he's told.
I'm pretty sure that companies like Lockheed Martin and McDonnell-Douglas would *love* to have gobs and gobs of cash being spent on the Aerospace industry. They'd make off like bandits. By your logic, wouldn't it make more sense to back somebody like Gingrich who wants to build a permanent manned presence on the moon by 2020? You do realize how much money that would entail for the aerospace industry? So why are they backing a candidate who says that this would be a waste of money, and that we should focus our research efforts elsewhere at the moment?
Don't get me wrong... Romney scares me the least of the current candidates the GOP has on the block, but he still scares the hell out of me. I watch American politics the way that most of the international community watches them: with a mix of dread, horror, and pure fascination. We watch, because we get screwed if we don't watch... the US is too influential internationally right now to ignore. But seriously, even your uber-left-wing-pinko-communist Democrat president is conservative by the standards of the rest of the world (seriously, why is public health care even on the political landscape in your country? it was done decades ago everywhere else in the world). It really is rather frightening what passes for conservatism in the US.
That being said, when you combine all of the offerings from all of the different manufacturers on all of the carriers around the world, I have a hard time believing that Apple managed to surpass all of the sales of Android with only 37 million sales.
The "discount" carrier is also likely to be unable or unwilling to activate its parent company's phones or "unlocked" phones. Good luck getting an iPhone to work on the U.S. networks of Boost or Virgin, even though their parent company Sprint offers an iPhone. It was only recently that Virgin Mobile USA got Android phones.
You'd be wrong.:) If I buy a phone through Koodo, they'll unlock it through their website, as long as my account is in good standing (no money owing, and no late payments on my bill over the last 3 months. They're more expensive than going through a company like gsmliberty.net, but they will do it.
And they will indeed activate their parent company's phones. They'll also activate phones from other carriers. In fact, their website actively encourages you to unlock your phone and bring it to them, and provides an easy way to check whether a phone on another network will work with theirs: http://koodomobile.com/en/on/switch2koodo.shtml My phone actually is one that was sold originally by the parent company for Koodo, and I've had it on 4 different networks in Canada without needing to replace it. (actually, it's getting a bit long in the tooth, and I've been shopping around for a replacement)
If I was travelling to the US, I'd just buy a US prepaid SIM and put it in my phone. There are US carriers who will sell you a SIM without selling you a phone, and as long as the network is either quad-band GSM or 850/1900/2100 HSPA or WCDMA, my phone will work. That means I can use t-mob, ATT, VZW, or any of the carriers that use their networks, as long as I can get my hands on a SIM and put minutes on it. In the US, I admit that's a bit difficult, but $2/day unlimited everything pay as you go from ATT is quite amenable for a short trip, and they were happy sell me a SIM without a phone when I needed one last summer. Sprint is a special animal... for some reason, they still use CDMA for their network, and have not gone to WCDMA with SIM cards yet. All of the other major players in the US use SIM cards, however, and can work with any unlocked phone as long as the phone supports the appropriate frequencies.
Isn't the speech recognition on Android done locally? I know that I can use speech-to-sms when data is turned off on my phone... why on earth wouldn't Apple put the speech recognition on the phone, and the semantic recognition done remotely? That would reduce bandwidth requirements considerably....
it is just stupid to take such a contract only because you get new phone "by $49-99"
Yes, but the stupidity is not in offering that contract, it's in accepting it. People want the latest and the greatest, so they're happy to sign on for 3 years if they get the latest and the greatest for a tiny fraction of the actual cost. Sure, they're paying twice what they would monthly to the cell company than they could get from somebody else, but they don't see that part of the bargain, nor the fact that the extra $40/mo they're paying for the cell phone over a contract on a "discount" carrier (most of whom are owned by the same companies they're buying from in the first place) amortised over the next 3 years ends up being way more than the discount they got on the phone in the first place.
Case in point, here in Canada, my cell phone is with Koodo. That company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Telus. I pay $40/mo for 150 anytime minutes, 5pm evenings/weekends, unlimited global texting, call display, voicemail, 3-way calling, unlimited domestic long distance, and a small amount of data. It's actually a flex data plan, but I use so little that I'm on the bottom tier. I have no contract, and the phone I'm using I actually bought at retail for $300 a year and a half ago and unlocked. To make the numbers fair, we'll pretend I'm using 1GB of data per month, because 500mb is the lowest I can get from Telus, and the flex plan goes from 300mb to 1GB. That'd make my total bill $55/mo for that amount of data usage with Koodo (or $50 if you prefer the 300mb tier).
Now, from Telus, to get the same features we'll say 200 anytime minutes, 6pm evenings/weekends, 500mb of data, and voicemail, that would be $50/mo. I can add unlimited domestic text or double anytime minutes for free. We'll take domestic texting because of the way the economics work out with addons, and pretend I don't text internationally (which I do, extensively). Now, for an additional $25/mo I can make my minutes national long distance, and add call display. That's $75/mo for basically the same features, but no international texting. Now let's say we want international texting as well... for the low price of $25/mo, we can add a block of 500 international texts. (never mind that I've been known to pass that in a day). We're now at $100/mo for the same basic features of a plan I can get from Koodo for $55/mo. And the Koodo version of the plan has unlimited international texting (instead of just 500), and twice the data. Koodo does have 50 fewer daytime minutes, but unlimited evenings/weekends starts an hour earlier with Koodo as well.
And the real bitch of it? It's the same company. Telus and Koodo use exactly the same network, and Koodo is a 100% owned subsidiary of Telus. The only difference between them is that with Telus, you can get an iPhone 4S 16GB for $169 on a 3-year contract, where on Koodo, the phone costs $500 on the tab (no contract. they'll subsidize up to $150 of the cost of a new phone, and 10% of your pre-tax monthly bill goes to pay the tab off... when you leave, you pay off the remaining tab and call it equal. tab works in the other direction and you can have a credit of up to $150 on your tab as well, so you *could* actually get the iPhone 4S for $350 if you have a credit). The problem is, people look at the $169 cost from Telus, and say "awesome!". They don't realize that $50 extra per month over 12 months is $300, and makes up most of the difference between buying it from Koodo instead, let alone the other 2 years on your contract.
I'm having a hard time thinking of a legitimate reason to download bomb-making plans from the Internet. I can think of plenty of reasons to know how to make a bomb, either because it's part of your job, or because you have enough of a grasp of the physics and chemistry behind it. It's actually not that difficult for anybody who's taken organic chem, and anybody with higher level education in chemistry shouldn't have a hard time coming up with suggestions for chemicals you can mix together and get something explosive. Hell, I was taught the recipe for TNT when I was in high school (along with the caveat that I was a moron if I ever tried actually making it at home, because of the chance of explosion if I got the energy source wrong). I'd lay odds that a great number of people reading this know how to make at least some kind of explosive (will clarify: high explosive. you can get a pretty effective low explosive for about $5 a gallon), and have a good enough grasp of the physics to turn it into a bomb if they wanted to, and I would lay equally good odds that most if not all of those people didn't need to find those instructions on the Internet, they just needed to pay attention in school.
The point I'm trying to make is that yes, the information is out there. It's easy to come by. But if you're in any kind of position where you have a legitimate reason to actually know how to make a bomb, then chances are pretty high that you're not going to need to download instructions from the Internet. You'll either have been taught how to do it as part of the training to get where you are, or you'll have been taught as part of the training when you started your current job. Not that I have any love for the idea of thought police, nor for pre-crime, but I have a hard time thinking of a legitimate case for somebody to need to get that information off the Internet. Particularly not when the information you're seeking also includes instructions on how to resist interrogation, and a shopping list including items like an assault rifle, a grenade launcher, ammunition, and instructions on combat tactics.
Actually, we're not. We have observed tool use among other mammals, primates, and birds. We have a distinct advantage over a crow, in the form of an opposable thumb, but don't make the mistake of thinking we're the only species on this planet to make and use tools.
Electronic Stability Control is actually required by law in Canada, now, and since essentially the same cars get sold in Canada as the US, that will lead to it becoming more common in the US.
That means nothing for a 2007 MY car, but the 2011 Rav4 does have traction control, anti-lock brakes, slip control, skid control, and yaw control. That said, Transport Canada's website lists the 2007 Rav4 as having Traction Control as a standard option. It may be different in the US, but up here at least, it has it.
no, see... it wasn't a freedom of the press issue, it was a freedom of the reporters issue. Two completely different things! The press is still free to report whatever they want, but the reporters can be imprisoned all the government wants without infringing on that!
How odd. In my 2011 Subaru Impreza, it literally is a button. It's down and to the left of the steering wheel, near where the hood release is (but several inches from it, and a completely different action to activate it). You press the button, an idiot light lights up on the console indicating that TC is disabled, and it remains disabled until either you press the button again, or you turn the car off.
Your instructions are for a 2007 Rav4. Do you know if the later models have that same limitation? That's an utterly ridiculous series of steps to follow to disable something that won't let you start uphill on an icy road. Even more stupid when you consider that you'll almost certainly run into the same problem in any kind of serious off-roading, and the Rav4 is supposed to be an off-road car.
Do you ask the CEO of Ford whether that Toyota car you are thinking about getting is any good?
Actually, I would. I would probably already know the answer, and the honesty in the answer from the guy from Ford might make me consider his products as an alternative.
Sadly, I have never gotten a straight answer like that from the actual salespeople who work for Ford... when I was buying a new car last February, I was treated like a piece of meat by the Ford folks. I had really one requirement in my car: full time all-wheel drive. A manual transmission was wanted, but wasn't a deal-breaker. I live in a northern part of the world, and not having it isn't an option in the winter. And rather than trying to sell me on the benefits of their system (not to mention why I should spend twice as much for their car that had it than I ended up spending on a Subaru), they proceeded to tell me everything that was wrong with Subaru's system. (completely ignoring the fact that the Ford system actually *is* the Subaru system, technology that they licensed when they part-owned Volvo). End result: the salesman lost a commission, and I ended up getting a car better suited to my needs for half the cost. I got my 4-wheel drive, my manual transmission (which I couldn't get in the Ford), and as an added bonus it's a more efficient engine, and it has a traction control off button that actually turns the traction control off. I call it the "let me have fun" button./rant off
There are more cost-effective places in space we could set up a manned base, however. Not to mention more useful. L2 would be a good idea... relatively close and wouldn't require much more push than the moon, but wouldn't need all of the expensive (in space *and* weight) landing gear you'd need for the moon. Not to mention being a better launching point for deep space.
Then again, Mr. Gingrich promising a moon base is more likely to be him trying to pander to people who know more about it than him than any serious intent. If he had half a clue what he was talking about, he wouldn't be promising to do it by 2020, nor would he be suggesting the moon... that would bankrupt the nation. Oh wait. the US is already bankrupt. It would bankrupt any of the US's creditors who are stupid enough to give them the money for it.
Slashdot Mirror
Only in the Americas do CDMA2000 networks still use MEID for authentication, as far as I know.
Only in the USA, as far as I know... here in Canada, Telus/Bell (and their subsidiaries and hangers-on) are using a WCDMA/HSPA network on 850/1900, and they've switched to SIM cards too. They do still support CDMA devices, as they've sold them, but they don't sell them any more. The only other major players in the country were using GSM with SIM cards all along.
Actually, I think even in the USA, they've changed their tune... Verizon used to be the only holdout, and a quick search of their website shows that you can get a SIM card for their network now. T-Mob was on GSM since the beginning, and you've been able to get a SIM card for ATT for years now.
Only, it's not the first of its kind.
http://www.rogers.com/web/content/dataSharing?setLanguage=en&setProvince=ON
Just off the top of my head. They were flogging that as a great new feature a year ago. Not that I would ever buy from that particular company, I think they're evil incarnate. But they did offer data sharing a long time ago. Putting it on an "unlimited" data plan is new, but the main reason Rogers doesn't do that is that they don't have unlimited data plans. I imagine that if they did have unlimited data plans in the first place, they'd offer it too... probably for a price that's just as obscenely out to lunch as the one that's discussed in TFA: for what Rogers would charge to share 3GB of data and 200 minutes between two phones, you can get two unlimited everything phones from Wind... unlimited data, unlimited minutes, unlimited texting, and unlimited long distance.
Similarly, I doubt very much that the companies TFA is discussing will be particularly friendly with their pricing....
We do, actually, have *exactly* fios. Just not in Ontario/Quebec (yet). And actually, even that's not entirely true, as Bell has been unrolling their FTTH networks in Quebec and Ontario for a while now... Quebec City, for example, doesn't have any copper at all any more, and most new subdivisions being built near major centres in Ontario and Quebec are FTTH, with no copper at all being sold. Bell is selling up to 150mbit connections with IPTV (not counting against that 150mbit) in some areas, and as I understand it, they're actually installing OC-48 lines. Just not everywhere. The footprint isn't very big at the moment, but it's happening.
Of course, Bell is still years behind Aliant... they've got their FibreOP service available through large parts of the maritimes.
I wonder if this Rogers study was looking at the best possible available from all providers, and saying "see? you can get 150mbit Internet from Bell, we're better than other countries!" without looking at the little asterisk that says it's only available to a few thousand people out of the country's 35 million.
Just so we're clear on how Constitutional law is *supposed* to work: Nothing can legally 'trump' the Constitution or any of the Amendments, save an Amendment itself. All federal legislation that contradicts the Constitution and existing Amendments is, technically, not law. /rant
Yup. And the Ninth Amendment deals with unenumerated rights. The right to be free from harassment would be one of those unenumerated rights, and when combined with the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment serves as the basis for why a human rights commission can overrule the First Amendment in human rights cases. And as I said previously, the WA Human Rights Commission holds that unwanted display of pornography is sexual harassment, and falls under the jurisdiction of human rights law.
Depends on who you're comparing it against. I pay $42/mo for 12meg DSL with a 300GB cap, and unmetered usage between 2am and 8am. Compared to the US, that's *really* cheap. Compared to South Korea? You've gotta be kidding me.
That being said, it does depend on where you are. The FTTH service that Aliant sells on the east coast is *way* cheaper than DSL services in Ontario/Quebec. Still, I do have to ask what developed countries the "study" looked at, because anecdotally I know that many developed countries in Europe put Canada to shame.
Ever heard of sexual harassment? The guy watching porn was doing it.
Because the guy watching the porn is in the wrong, as what he's doing is considered sexual harassment in WA?
There are circumstances that trump the first amendment, and human rights law is one of them. The library's wrong here, as is the guy watching the porn. It has nothing to do with whether he decides to whip it out and start pleasuring himself.
If that computer screen is sitting on top of a desk, and is a reasonably large size, and facing an open public space, what makes you think there's any expectation of privacy there? It's not a question of minding your own business, it's a question of public display of pornographic material.
The Washington State Human Rights Commission says, quite plainly that such a display of pornographic material is sexual harassment. The US First Amendment guarantees free speech, yes, but there are numerous cases where it is trumped by another statute. You are not, for example, allowed to walk into a crowded theatre and yell "fire!" Similarly, you can't walk into a public school and start shouting obscenities over the PA system. Human Rights, and specifically to this case Sexual Harassment, are one of these cases. The First Amendment is *not* a carte blanche.
In other words, the library is wrong in this case. They are creating a hostile environment by allowing sexual harassment to continue, and they had better hope they have a *really* good lawyer if this woman decides to take it further.
That's a 5" Mk.45 gun, not a rifle, and it's not a sniper, it's an artillery shot. ;) That thing has a range well over 5 miles... more like 13nm according to wiki. :) The navy has guns with an operational range >20mi if you're willing to allow a bigger gun like a 12" or a 16"...
Of course, if you're going to allow the Navy to use big guns as "sniper" weapons, I'm going to allow the Army to use an excalibur round... 200+ mile range on that particular type of artillery. :P
World record is a mile and a half. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/sniper_kills_qaeda_from_mi_away_sTm0xFUmJNal3HgWlmEgRL
5 miles? That's pushing the limits of physics just a little too much. It would take a shitload of luck to get a hit from that far away. Farthest I've personally seen done is just over a mile (1800m).
And as others have pointed out, it takes time and money to train a sniper. It also takes a *lot* of luck at the upper ends of distance. You have to account for ballistic trajectory, air resistance (which changes with the temperature), wind (which can change directions remarkably easily), moving targets, etc.. Even at the speeds a bullet travels at, it still takes a discernable amount of time to reach the target at that distance. Having something you can fire and forget, and let your spotter guide it to its target with a laser pointer is a huge improvement, IMO. And besides, it's not going to cost a million bucks a pop once it's in production. Development may have cost that, but nothing in the device is all that expensive to actually make.
The guys backing Romney, like Mike Griffin, are lobbyists for the current major aerospace players, like ATK, who don't want change. They have lobbied ruthlessly against any changes to improve NASA, or build a more competitive low-cost commercial launch industry. It's no wonder they are backing Romney. He will do what he's told.
I'm pretty sure that companies like Lockheed Martin and McDonnell-Douglas would *love* to have gobs and gobs of cash being spent on the Aerospace industry. They'd make off like bandits. By your logic, wouldn't it make more sense to back somebody like Gingrich who wants to build a permanent manned presence on the moon by 2020? You do realize how much money that would entail for the aerospace industry? So why are they backing a candidate who says that this would be a waste of money, and that we should focus our research efforts elsewhere at the moment?
Don't get me wrong... Romney scares me the least of the current candidates the GOP has on the block, but he still scares the hell out of me. I watch American politics the way that most of the international community watches them: with a mix of dread, horror, and pure fascination. We watch, because we get screwed if we don't watch... the US is too influential internationally right now to ignore. But seriously, even your uber-left-wing-pinko-communist Democrat president is conservative by the standards of the rest of the world (seriously, why is public health care even on the political landscape in your country? it was done decades ago everywhere else in the world). It really is rather frightening what passes for conservatism in the US.
And WinMo *is* a smartphone platform...
That being said, when you combine all of the offerings from all of the different manufacturers on all of the carriers around the world, I have a hard time believing that Apple managed to surpass all of the sales of Android with only 37 million sales.
He's pining for the fjords, is he?
The "discount" carrier is also likely to be unable or unwilling to activate its parent company's phones or "unlocked" phones. Good luck getting an iPhone to work on the U.S. networks of Boost or Virgin, even though their parent company Sprint offers an iPhone. It was only recently that Virgin Mobile USA got Android phones.
You'd be wrong. :) If I buy a phone through Koodo, they'll unlock it through their website, as long as my account is in good standing (no money owing, and no late payments on my bill over the last 3 months. They're more expensive than going through a company like gsmliberty.net, but they will do it.
And they will indeed activate their parent company's phones. They'll also activate phones from other carriers. In fact, their website actively encourages you to unlock your phone and bring it to them, and provides an easy way to check whether a phone on another network will work with theirs: http://koodomobile.com/en/on/switch2koodo.shtml My phone actually is one that was sold originally by the parent company for Koodo, and I've had it on 4 different networks in Canada without needing to replace it. (actually, it's getting a bit long in the tooth, and I've been shopping around for a replacement)
If I was travelling to the US, I'd just buy a US prepaid SIM and put it in my phone. There are US carriers who will sell you a SIM without selling you a phone, and as long as the network is either quad-band GSM or 850/1900/2100 HSPA or WCDMA, my phone will work. That means I can use t-mob, ATT, VZW, or any of the carriers that use their networks, as long as I can get my hands on a SIM and put minutes on it. In the US, I admit that's a bit difficult, but $2/day unlimited everything pay as you go from ATT is quite amenable for a short trip, and they were happy sell me a SIM without a phone when I needed one last summer. Sprint is a special animal... for some reason, they still use CDMA for their network, and have not gone to WCDMA with SIM cards yet. All of the other major players in the US use SIM cards, however, and can work with any unlocked phone as long as the phone supports the appropriate frequencies.
Isn't the speech recognition on Android done locally? I know that I can use speech-to-sms when data is turned off on my phone... why on earth wouldn't Apple put the speech recognition on the phone, and the semantic recognition done remotely? That would reduce bandwidth requirements considerably....
it is just stupid to take such a contract only because you get new phone "by $49-99"
Yes, but the stupidity is not in offering that contract, it's in accepting it. People want the latest and the greatest, so they're happy to sign on for 3 years if they get the latest and the greatest for a tiny fraction of the actual cost. Sure, they're paying twice what they would monthly to the cell company than they could get from somebody else, but they don't see that part of the bargain, nor the fact that the extra $40/mo they're paying for the cell phone over a contract on a "discount" carrier (most of whom are owned by the same companies they're buying from in the first place) amortised over the next 3 years ends up being way more than the discount they got on the phone in the first place.
Case in point, here in Canada, my cell phone is with Koodo. That company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Telus. I pay $40/mo for 150 anytime minutes, 5pm evenings/weekends, unlimited global texting, call display, voicemail, 3-way calling, unlimited domestic long distance, and a small amount of data. It's actually a flex data plan, but I use so little that I'm on the bottom tier. I have no contract, and the phone I'm using I actually bought at retail for $300 a year and a half ago and unlocked. To make the numbers fair, we'll pretend I'm using 1GB of data per month, because 500mb is the lowest I can get from Telus, and the flex plan goes from 300mb to 1GB. That'd make my total bill $55/mo for that amount of data usage with Koodo (or $50 if you prefer the 300mb tier).
Now, from Telus, to get the same features we'll say 200 anytime minutes, 6pm evenings/weekends, 500mb of data, and voicemail, that would be $50/mo. I can add unlimited domestic text or double anytime minutes for free. We'll take domestic texting because of the way the economics work out with addons, and pretend I don't text internationally (which I do, extensively). Now, for an additional $25/mo I can make my minutes national long distance, and add call display. That's $75/mo for basically the same features, but no international texting. Now let's say we want international texting as well... for the low price of $25/mo, we can add a block of 500 international texts. (never mind that I've been known to pass that in a day). We're now at $100/mo for the same basic features of a plan I can get from Koodo for $55/mo. And the Koodo version of the plan has unlimited international texting (instead of just 500), and twice the data. Koodo does have 50 fewer daytime minutes, but unlimited evenings/weekends starts an hour earlier with Koodo as well.
And the real bitch of it? It's the same company. Telus and Koodo use exactly the same network, and Koodo is a 100% owned subsidiary of Telus. The only difference between them is that with Telus, you can get an iPhone 4S 16GB for $169 on a 3-year contract, where on Koodo, the phone costs $500 on the tab (no contract. they'll subsidize up to $150 of the cost of a new phone, and 10% of your pre-tax monthly bill goes to pay the tab off... when you leave, you pay off the remaining tab and call it equal. tab works in the other direction and you can have a credit of up to $150 on your tab as well, so you *could* actually get the iPhone 4S for $350 if you have a credit). The problem is, people look at the $169 cost from Telus, and say "awesome!". They don't realize that $50 extra per month over 12 months is $300, and makes up most of the difference between buying it from Koodo instead, let alone the other 2 years on your contract.
I'm having a hard time thinking of a legitimate reason to download bomb-making plans from the Internet. I can think of plenty of reasons to know how to make a bomb, either because it's part of your job, or because you have enough of a grasp of the physics and chemistry behind it. It's actually not that difficult for anybody who's taken organic chem, and anybody with higher level education in chemistry shouldn't have a hard time coming up with suggestions for chemicals you can mix together and get something explosive. Hell, I was taught the recipe for TNT when I was in high school (along with the caveat that I was a moron if I ever tried actually making it at home, because of the chance of explosion if I got the energy source wrong). I'd lay odds that a great number of people reading this know how to make at least some kind of explosive (will clarify: high explosive. you can get a pretty effective low explosive for about $5 a gallon), and have a good enough grasp of the physics to turn it into a bomb if they wanted to, and I would lay equally good odds that most if not all of those people didn't need to find those instructions on the Internet, they just needed to pay attention in school.
The point I'm trying to make is that yes, the information is out there. It's easy to come by. But if you're in any kind of position where you have a legitimate reason to actually know how to make a bomb, then chances are pretty high that you're not going to need to download instructions from the Internet. You'll either have been taught how to do it as part of the training to get where you are, or you'll have been taught as part of the training when you started your current job. Not that I have any love for the idea of thought police, nor for pre-crime, but I have a hard time thinking of a legitimate case for somebody to need to get that information off the Internet. Particularly not when the information you're seeking also includes instructions on how to resist interrogation, and a shopping list including items like an assault rifle, a grenade launcher, ammunition, and instructions on combat tactics.
Actually, we're not. We have observed tool use among other mammals, primates, and birds. We have a distinct advantage over a crow, in the form of an opposable thumb, but don't make the mistake of thinking we're the only species on this planet to make and use tools.
Electronic Stability Control is actually required by law in Canada, now, and since essentially the same cars get sold in Canada as the US, that will lead to it becoming more common in the US.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/roadsafety/tp-tp14651-vs200701-menu-738.htm
That means nothing for a 2007 MY car, but the 2011 Rav4 does have traction control, anti-lock brakes, slip control, skid control, and yaw control. That said, Transport Canada's website lists the 2007 Rav4 as having Traction Control as a standard option. It may be different in the US, but up here at least, it has it.
no, see... it wasn't a freedom of the press issue, it was a freedom of the reporters issue. Two completely different things! The press is still free to report whatever they want, but the reporters can be imprisoned all the government wants without infringing on that!
^.~
Never seen The Producers, have you?
How odd. In my 2011 Subaru Impreza, it literally is a button. It's down and to the left of the steering wheel, near where the hood release is (but several inches from it, and a completely different action to activate it). You press the button, an idiot light lights up on the console indicating that TC is disabled, and it remains disabled until either you press the button again, or you turn the car off.
Your instructions are for a 2007 Rav4. Do you know if the later models have that same limitation? That's an utterly ridiculous series of steps to follow to disable something that won't let you start uphill on an icy road. Even more stupid when you consider that you'll almost certainly run into the same problem in any kind of serious off-roading, and the Rav4 is supposed to be an off-road car.
Do you ask the CEO of Ford whether that Toyota car you are thinking about getting is any good?
Actually, I would. I would probably already know the answer, and the honesty in the answer from the guy from Ford might make me consider his products as an alternative.
Sadly, I have never gotten a straight answer like that from the actual salespeople who work for Ford... when I was buying a new car last February, I was treated like a piece of meat by the Ford folks. I had really one requirement in my car: full time all-wheel drive. A manual transmission was wanted, but wasn't a deal-breaker. I live in a northern part of the world, and not having it isn't an option in the winter. And rather than trying to sell me on the benefits of their system (not to mention why I should spend twice as much for their car that had it than I ended up spending on a Subaru), they proceeded to tell me everything that was wrong with Subaru's system. (completely ignoring the fact that the Ford system actually *is* the Subaru system, technology that they licensed when they part-owned Volvo). End result: the salesman lost a commission, and I ended up getting a car better suited to my needs for half the cost. I got my 4-wheel drive, my manual transmission (which I couldn't get in the Ford), and as an added bonus it's a more efficient engine, and it has a traction control off button that actually turns the traction control off. I call it the "let me have fun" button. /rant off
And that was done. By the Russians.
There are more cost-effective places in space we could set up a manned base, however. Not to mention more useful. L2 would be a good idea... relatively close and wouldn't require much more push than the moon, but wouldn't need all of the expensive (in space *and* weight) landing gear you'd need for the moon. Not to mention being a better launching point for deep space.
Then again, Mr. Gingrich promising a moon base is more likely to be him trying to pander to people who know more about it than him than any serious intent. If he had half a clue what he was talking about, he wouldn't be promising to do it by 2020, nor would he be suggesting the moon... that would bankrupt the nation. Oh wait. the US is already bankrupt. It would bankrupt any of the US's creditors who are stupid enough to give them the money for it.