In the incident from the video the fault lies with the manned plane, who did a low altitude flyby on an in-use runway without permission. Even though it crashed into a very large R/C craft, it didn't cause enough damage to take down the manned plane and nobody was injured or killed. Just because collisions CAN happen, doesn't mean that they're automatically catastrophic and also doesn't mean that the R/C pilot is always at fault. There are already regulations and procedures in place to prevent such incidents as long as pilots follow them.
If you are looking for actual freedom, may I suggest (controversial!) that you consider Russia? Those of a certain age (especially aficionados of Tom Clancy) may scowl at the mere suggestion of "going over to the Reds". But if you are younger and reasonably open-minded, please look at the evidence. There is actually more freedom in Russia these days than anywhere in "the West". For instance, it may soon be one of the few places where you can be sure of getting healthy GM-free food.
Russia has freedom? Tell that to the members of Pussy Riot, who were jailed for protesting the Russian Orthodox Church. I'm sure they are feeling quite free.
If she was so drunk she couldn't remember how she got the room, that's a clear sign to Richmond that she couldn't consent and he should have stopped. Even if she was making advances to him, being that drunk is an automatic "no" because the capacity to consent does not exist.
Maybe it was Richmond who was sexually assaulted in that instance. He was very drunk and she engaged in sexual activity with him. If they are both so drunk that neither one can consent why is the onus upon him to stop and not upon her?
Because of the infeasibility of studying this phenomenon experimentally, it is unclear whether the association can be causally attributed to marijuana use itself or is instead the result of confounding factors. We approach this issue quasiexperimentally using longitudinal samples of adolescent twins.
Wonder if there are any twin studies that detail the life outcomes of stoner/non-stoner twins? That would be more useful I think.
We used a quasiexperimental approach to adjust for participants’ family background characteristics and genetic propensities, helping us to assess the causal nature of any potential associations. Standardized measures of intelligence were administered at ages 9–12 y, before marijuana involvement, and again at ages 17–20 y. Marijuana use was self-reported at the time of each cognitive assessment as well as during the intervening period. (no drug test to confirm usage or non-usage?) Marijuana users had lower test scores relative to nonusers and showed a significant decline in crystallized intelligence between preadolescence and late adolescence.
Why did you stop there?
Evidence from these two samples suggests that observed declines in measured IQ may not be a direct result of marijuana exposure but rather attributable to familial factors that underlie both marijuana initiation and low intellectual attainment.
In other words, it is likely other factors in a person's life (like the home environment) that is causing the IQ decline noted in some studies. The people with a crappy home life are also more likely to smoke marijuana so the IQ decline was showing up in marijuana studies. But since we don't see the effect in twins where one smoked and one didn't we don't think it is the MJ causing it.
Apple will be assembling productsin the US within 10 yrs, using robotics, but it won't help employment rates because it will all be robotics based.
Why do you hate the Robotic poor so much? How can they move up to the Robotic middle class without access to well paying Robotic jobs? Or do you have a hidden hate for the 1% Robotic overlords?
You're totally right, we should triple the robotic minimum wage!
And if you compare the first stage of spaceX with something like Adeline - which was what I compared - then you can definitely make an economic (better) case for the latter.
Yes, but you're comparing something that is currently flying to something that has absolutely no flight hardware developed. Adeline is just a dream in some CAD designer's mind at this point. Once they actually develop something (they are saying 2025 for first flight, so count on 2030 or later) then you can make comparisons but until then there is nothing to compare.
Getting rid of phone numbers could get rid of bullshit phone sales people or so-called telemarketers, nonsense charities, and bill collectors. Since I uusally get several annoying such calls, every day, I think getting rid of phone numbers is a great idea.
So you are trusting an advertising company (Facebook) to get rid of people marketing stuff to you? Good luck with that!
Not to mention that the "killing of two people" was the deaths of the people conducting the attack. The attackers shot up a police car, hitting a security guard in the ankle, then they were both killed by return fire. No innocents were killed in the attack and the only (non-jihadist) injury was to the security guard. There is no evidence that an encryption backdoor would have changed anything, they are complaining that they couldn't read this guy's messages after he was already dead.
Law enforcement and US intelligence already have unprecedented data on every person in the US, hell most of the people voluntarily carry a tracking device so the government can know where they are at all times. They can read every email and record every telephone conversation. But even with the massive amount of intel they have on everybody they still want MORE. They will never be satisfied until every person is under their complete control every minute of the day. At least in 1984 Winston Smith had a place in his apartment where he could get out of view of the telescreen, these days people don't have such luxury. Also, we have always been at war with Eastasia.
She is also a criminal. How inthe world could you vote for her? Not that i particually like anyone running on the republican line but, to my knowledge none has been proven to disregard their oath of office as hillary has done with her email server.
That's because the frontrunners for the Republican nomination (Trump, Carson) have NEVER held public office. Hard to disregard your oath if you never take one.
The server was set up so she can do all her dirty business deals outside the eyes of the federal watchdogd. A complete disregard of the law. She tried to hide her pay Bill to get favors criminal act. Not to mention the clintons history of anti women anti law pratices. Bill hangs out and visits known sex traficers . He went to the island but did not know what was going on . Please
People don't vote against their self interest, take welfare for example there are two kinds of people that voted for it, the ones who will benefit from it and the others who feel good about themselves for doing so. In my experience it is impossible to vote against your self interest it's just that people value different things more then others.
It depends on what issue they are voting. For example, many poor religious people will vote for a candidate because he is against abortion or gay marriage but are voting against their own financial self-interest as the candidate may be against many welfare/aid programs that would benefit them. A large number of voters are single-issue or single-party voters and the representatives they end up with often are working against their interests, even though the representative aligns with their views on their hot-button issue.
I guess it could minimize fatalities, but I'm thinking of a bunch of armed people firing at each other in a relative small place and wondering if as many people would end up struck by "friendly" bullets as by the mass shooters.
Given how media favors gun control, every single incident where a citizen killed bystanders with "friendly fire" would be widely reported on as evidence for guns causing more harm than good.
Instead, there is silence on that topic because citizens using guns in self defense save lives.
When "highly trained" police officers shoot nine innocent civilians when trying to shoot a suspect, what are the chances that Joe Blow (who hasn't been to the range since he got his concealed carry permit) will avoid collateral damage?
(Full disclosure: I am neither 5'10" nor born in 1972).
The atheist reader who is 5'10" and was born in 1972 is probably looking over his shoulder thinking "how did he know... ?"
(Full disclosure: can't be me; I'm just over 5'11").
No, because atheists are good at separating coincidence from purpose. Someone who is religious or spiritual might think it is "spooky" and believe that the OP has ESP but the atheist will know that it is just happenstance. It isn't atheists that are being featured in news stories about being bilked out of thousands of dollars by psychics.
Precisely, when you have supporters and opponents of this law on both sides and crossing party lines. While most GOP candidates seem to be for it, Ron Paul is not alone, and is supported at least by Ted Cruz here. What I want to know is that of the Dems, who opposes the wiretaps? Clinton? Obama? Bernie? O'Malley?
NASCAR is a sport the same way two idiots punching the living shit out of each is.
Just because it is stupid doesn't imply it not a sport.
If you have a winner/loser, and viewers, it is a sport (regardless of how dumb it is.)
So if I'm playing football in the park with friends and nobody is watching, it's not a sport? But somehow the same activity becomes a sport the minute a non-player shows up?
So now we know for sure which are the propaganda mills in "mainstream" news. I read anti-encryption articles on at least CNN, MSN, Fox, and Infoworld. Are there any others worthy of mention in this context? They are now off my list of "reputable news" sources, though they may be useful for staying up on current events... take it with a grain of salt.
The BBC: Paris attacks: Silicon Valley in crosshairs over encryption Some gems from the article: "And I do think this is a time for particularly Europe, as well as here in the United States, for us to take a look and see whether or not there have been some inadvertent or intentional gaps that have been created in the ability of intelligence and security services to protect the people that they are asked to serve."
while attitudes towards creating government backdoors were "hostile", that atmosphere "could turn in the event of a terrorist attack or criminal event where strong encryption can be shown to have hindered law enforcement". Paris may just be that event.
It's just ridiculous. Intelligence agencies and police have unprecedented data and location tracking on nearly every person in the world and it's STILL NOT ENOUGH for them. They will never be satisfied, even if every person in the world provided them a 24/7 video feed they would demand constant brainwave scans to "protect our children". It's time to say enough is enough and remove the people in favor of a surveillance state from a position of power, either by voting them out of office or voting the people who appointed them out of office.
Take for example something like handbreak. Unless you *knew* what it was. You would have no idea what that thing did (video editing software).
And even if you know the name of the program, you still may not be able to find it. If you search for 'handbreak' you won't find what you are looking for because it is spelled 'handbrake'. That's something that's easy to see in a menu but hard to recognize when your search fails.
Is anyone using any transcontinental copper any more? I would also assume that if it is possible to tap deep-sea FO cable, that they have done the same already.
I'd like for someone who lays down FO for commercial work to chime in on the feasibility of either a passive or active tap of such deep-sea cable.
Here is an article on current undersea cable eavesdropping, according to it fibre cables are currently being monitored.
Supposedly "severance" means that you get a (huge) lump sum at departure and the bank could argue that the reason why the same was so big (rather than the bare legal minimum)
By the "bare legal minimum" do you mean "nothing at all" or are there states where severance is mandated by law?
You're not the reason this is happening, and you're not the people they're targeting. The majority of your old-school RC pilots are the ones who pay attention to the Academy of Model Aeronautics guidelines and whatnot, and generally know how not to be an idiot when flying. What the FAA is worried about is daddy dropping $60 for a Syma X5C to buy for junior's sixteenth birthday, and then junior flying it over the bleachers at the homecoming game and someone getting smacked in the head when he loses a blade by flying too close to a lamppost.
The problem is that the regulation is going to affect the former group of people more than the latter. The people who already follow the regulations and fly responsibly are the ones who will actually register and the people flying in stupid places are the people who aren't going to register. The only thing this is going to accomplish is the headlines are going to change from "A drone crashed on the football field" to "An unregistered drone crashed on the football field".
Slashdot Mirror
In the incident from the video the fault lies with the manned plane, who did a low altitude flyby on an in-use runway without permission. Even though it crashed into a very large R/C craft, it didn't cause enough damage to take down the manned plane and nobody was injured or killed. Just because collisions CAN happen, doesn't mean that they're automatically catastrophic and also doesn't mean that the R/C pilot is always at fault. There are already regulations and procedures in place to prevent such incidents as long as pilots follow them.
I'm thinking about jumping ship for the US.
If you are looking for actual freedom, may I suggest (controversial!) that you consider Russia? Those of a certain age (especially aficionados of Tom Clancy) may scowl at the mere suggestion of "going over to the Reds". But if you are younger and reasonably open-minded, please look at the evidence. There is actually more freedom in Russia these days than anywhere in "the West". For instance, it may soon be one of the few places where you can be sure of getting healthy GM-free food.
Russia has freedom? Tell that to the members of Pussy Riot, who were jailed for protesting the Russian Orthodox Church. I'm sure they are feeling quite free.
https://xkcd.com/927/
Dammit, everything posted in this thread has the sarcastic voice in my head. How am I supposed to know what's sincere?
If she was so drunk she couldn't remember how she got the room, that's a clear sign to Richmond that she couldn't consent and he should have stopped. Even if she was making advances to him, being that drunk is an automatic "no" because the capacity to consent does not exist.
Maybe it was Richmond who was sexually assaulted in that instance. He was very drunk and she engaged in sexual activity with him. If they are both so drunk that neither one can consent why is the onus upon him to stop and not upon her?
From the abstract:
Because of the infeasibility of studying this phenomenon experimentally, it is unclear whether the association can be causally attributed to marijuana use itself or is instead the result of confounding factors. We approach this issue quasiexperimentally using longitudinal samples of adolescent twins.
Wonder if there are any twin studies that detail the life outcomes of stoner/non-stoner twins? That would be more useful I think.
We used a quasiexperimental approach to adjust for participants’ family background characteristics and genetic propensities, helping us to assess the causal nature of any potential associations. Standardized measures of intelligence were administered at ages 9–12 y, before marijuana involvement, and again at ages 17–20 y. Marijuana use was self-reported at the time of each cognitive assessment as well as during the intervening period. (no drug test to confirm usage or non-usage?) Marijuana users had lower test scores relative to nonusers and showed a significant decline in crystallized intelligence between preadolescence and late adolescence.
Why did you stop there?
In other words, it is likely other factors in a person's life (like the home environment) that is causing the IQ decline noted in some studies. The people with a crappy home life are also more likely to smoke marijuana so the IQ decline was showing up in marijuana studies. But since we don't see the effect in twins where one smoked and one didn't we don't think it is the MJ causing it.
Apple will be assembling productsin the US within 10 yrs, using robotics, but it won't help employment rates because it will all be robotics based.
Why do you hate the Robotic poor so much? How can they move up to the Robotic middle class without access to well paying Robotic jobs? Or do you have a hidden hate for the 1% Robotic overlords?
You're totally right, we should triple the robotic minimum wage!
And if you compare the first stage of spaceX with something like Adeline - which was what I compared - then you can definitely make an economic (better) case for the latter.
Yes, but you're comparing something that is currently flying to something that has absolutely no flight hardware developed. Adeline is just a dream in some CAD designer's mind at this point. Once they actually develop something (they are saying 2025 for first flight, so count on 2030 or later) then you can make comparisons but until then there is nothing to compare.
Getting rid of phone numbers could get rid of bullshit phone sales people or so-called telemarketers, nonsense charities, and bill collectors. Since I uusally get several annoying such calls, every day, I think getting rid of phone numbers is a great idea.
So you are trusting an advertising company (Facebook) to get rid of people marketing stuff to you? Good luck with that!
Only the debugging cycle is very long and infested with politics.
So it's exactly like writing software.
In the US, a password cannot be forced from you as it would violate your 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Buahahahahahaha nope! It's adorable how you think the government obeys the constitution that created it.
Not to mention that the "killing of two people" was the deaths of the people conducting the attack. The attackers shot up a police car, hitting a security guard in the ankle, then they were both killed by return fire. No innocents were killed in the attack and the only (non-jihadist) injury was to the security guard. There is no evidence that an encryption backdoor would have changed anything, they are complaining that they couldn't read this guy's messages after he was already dead.
Law enforcement and US intelligence already have unprecedented data on every person in the US, hell most of the people voluntarily carry a tracking device so the government can know where they are at all times. They can read every email and record every telephone conversation. But even with the massive amount of intel they have on everybody they still want MORE. They will never be satisfied until every person is under their complete control every minute of the day. At least in 1984 Winston Smith had a place in his apartment where he could get out of view of the telescreen, these days people don't have such luxury. Also, we have always been at war with Eastasia.
She is also a criminal. How inthe world could you vote for her? Not that i particually like anyone running on the republican line but, to my knowledge none has been proven to disregard their oath of office as hillary has done with her email server.
That's because the frontrunners for the Republican nomination (Trump, Carson) have NEVER held public office. Hard to disregard your oath if you never take one.
The server was set up so she can do all her dirty business deals outside the eyes of the federal watchdogd. A complete disregard of the law. She tried to hide her pay Bill to get favors criminal act. Not to mention the clintons history of anti women anti law pratices. Bill hangs out and visits known sex traficers . He went to the island but did not know what was going on . Please
Too incoherent to even respond to.
People don't vote against their self interest, take welfare for example there are two kinds of people that voted for it, the ones who will benefit from it and the others who feel good about themselves for doing so. In my experience it is impossible to vote against your self interest it's just that people value different things more then others.
It depends on what issue they are voting. For example, many poor religious people will vote for a candidate because he is against abortion or gay marriage but are voting against their own financial self-interest as the candidate may be against many welfare/aid programs that would benefit them. A large number of voters are single-issue or single-party voters and the representatives they end up with often are working against their interests, even though the representative aligns with their views on their hot-button issue.
I guess it could minimize fatalities, but I'm thinking of a bunch of armed people firing at each other in a relative small place and wondering if as many people would end up struck by "friendly" bullets as by the mass shooters.
Your imagination doesn't match reality.
Given how media favors gun control, every single incident where a citizen killed bystanders with "friendly fire" would be widely reported on as evidence for guns causing more harm than good.
Instead, there is silence on that topic because citizens using guns in self defense save lives.
When "highly trained" police officers shoot nine innocent civilians when trying to shoot a suspect, what are the chances that Joe Blow (who hasn't been to the range since he got his concealed carry permit) will avoid collateral damage?
A dollar spent is a dollar that aids the economy.
Broken window fallacy
The atheist reader who is 5'10" and was born in 1972 is probably looking over his shoulder thinking "how did he know... ?"
(Full disclosure: can't be me; I'm just over 5'11").
No, because atheists are good at separating coincidence from purpose. Someone who is religious or spiritual might think it is "spooky" and believe that the OP has ESP but the atheist will know that it is just happenstance. It isn't atheists that are being featured in news stories about being bilked out of thousands of dollars by psychics.
Precisely, when you have supporters and opponents of this law on both sides and crossing party lines. While most GOP candidates seem to be for it, Ron Paul is not alone, and is supported at least by Ted Cruz here. What I want to know is that of the Dems, who opposes the wiretaps? Clinton? Obama? Bernie? O'Malley?
At the very least, Bernie
"He has introduced S. 1168, the “Restore Our Privacy Act,” to amend the PATRIOT Act to curtail overly broad surveillance by the government."
NASCAR is a sport the same way two idiots punching the living shit out of each is.
Just because it is stupid doesn't imply it not a sport.
If you have a winner/loser, and viewers, it is a sport (regardless of how dumb it is.)
So if I'm playing football in the park with friends and nobody is watching, it's not a sport? But somehow the same activity becomes a sport the minute a non-player shows up?
So now we know for sure which are the propaganda mills in "mainstream" news. I read anti-encryption articles on at least CNN, MSN, Fox, and Infoworld. Are there any others worthy of mention in this context? They are now off my list of "reputable news" sources, though they may be useful for staying up on current events... take it with a grain of salt.
The BBC: Paris attacks: Silicon Valley in crosshairs over encryption
Some gems from the article:
"And I do think this is a time for particularly Europe, as well as here in the United States, for us to take a look and see whether or not there have been some inadvertent or intentional gaps that have been created in the ability of intelligence and security services to protect the people that they are asked to serve."
while attitudes towards creating government backdoors were "hostile", that atmosphere "could turn in the event of a terrorist attack or criminal event where strong encryption can be shown to have hindered law enforcement". Paris may just be that event.
Also, some jackwagon New York prosecutor is calling for legislation mandating phone manufactures use weak encryption and provide backdoors for law enforcement:
A New York prosecutor is calling for federal legislation to weaken smartphone encryption
It's just ridiculous. Intelligence agencies and police have unprecedented data and location tracking on nearly every person in the world and it's STILL NOT ENOUGH for them. They will never be satisfied, even if every person in the world provided them a 24/7 video feed they would demand constant brainwave scans to "protect our children". It's time to say enough is enough and remove the people in favor of a surveillance state from a position of power, either by voting them out of office or voting the people who appointed them out of office.
Take for example something like handbreak. Unless you *knew* what it was. You would have no idea what that thing did (video editing software).
And even if you know the name of the program, you still may not be able to find it. If you search for 'handbreak' you won't find what you are looking for because it is spelled 'handbrake'. That's something that's easy to see in a menu but hard to recognize when your search fails.
Is anyone using any transcontinental copper any more? I would also assume that if it is possible to tap deep-sea FO cable, that they have done the same already.
I'd like for someone who lays down FO for commercial work to chime in on the feasibility of either a passive or active tap of such deep-sea cable.
Here is an article on current undersea cable eavesdropping, according to it fibre cables are currently being monitored.
I assume he is talking about Mr. Robot
Supposedly "severance" means that you get a (huge) lump sum at departure and the bank could argue that the reason why the same was so big (rather than the bare legal minimum)
By the "bare legal minimum" do you mean "nothing at all" or are there states where severance is mandated by law?
You're not the reason this is happening, and you're not the people they're targeting. The majority of your old-school RC pilots are the ones who pay attention to the Academy of Model Aeronautics guidelines and whatnot, and generally know how not to be an idiot when flying. What the FAA is worried about is daddy dropping $60 for a Syma X5C to buy for junior's sixteenth birthday, and then junior flying it over the bleachers at the homecoming game and someone getting smacked in the head when he loses a blade by flying too close to a lamppost.
The problem is that the regulation is going to affect the former group of people more than the latter. The people who already follow the regulations and fly responsibly are the ones who will actually register and the people flying in stupid places are the people who aren't going to register. The only thing this is going to accomplish is the headlines are going to change from "A drone crashed on the football field" to "An unregistered drone crashed on the football field".