Why is it that everyone refuses believe the CIA until they say something that they really want to believe? Those on the right don't believe the CIA until they say there are WMDs in Iraq and those on the left don't believe them until they say Plame was indeed undercover?
Why does anyone without a security clearance high enough to see all the relevant information on a given subject believe anything the CIA has to say?
As a truck driver, my cell phone is almost a necessity. I do take time to myself where my phone is turned off, much to the annoyance of my dispatcher. That is his problem, he doesn't pay my phone bill. When I go in to eat, my phone is off. When I go to sleep, the phone is off. When I am securing my cargo, the phone is in the truck. I carry a phone all the time, I just decide when it is turned on. It is no more a leash than anything else I use.
You make this sound like everything here was on the up and up right up until it got to court. You are talking about ballots that are just now being found 7 weeks after the election. I am not saying that all of these ballots are fraudulent, but since you can no longer verify the chain of custody on these ballots how can you say that these ballots are legitiment.
The case of new ballots in King County, Washington is looking more and more like fraud. Everytime the Democrat canidate falls further behind, King County suddenly finds more ballots. This may be incompetency, but the more ballots keep getting getting found 2 months after the election the more it looks like fraud. A recount is supposed to count ballots already counted, not give the losing side time to manufacture new ones.
There is no denying that what happened at Abu Ghraib was horrible and disgraceful. However, what happened was more than likely the actions of less than 20 out of over 250,000. I make no excuses for what happened. I do not justify it. I do think there are too many of you who have never served in the armed forces and assume that everyone who has gone through basic training is automatically a controlled automaton. In most cases those who are in the military are stable and do as they are trained to do. The military is not, and probably never will be, immune to having rogues who will find a way to do things their own way.
There are too many people who are of the opinion that we should never have gone to Iraq. That is fine, they are entitled to that opinion. However, these people take it a step further by condemning anything that happens there if it happens to hurt someone. It doesn't seem to matter what those people have done, our people are wrong. The problem is that this does not help the situation. Everyone wants our troops home as soon as possible. Bringing them home before we have done what we can to stablize that area would make all the suffering on both sides a complete waste. I am not saying that the area can be stabilized, but we haven't been there long enough yet to make that determination.
I am not saying that anyone has to agree with everything that happens over there. But please, limit your complaints to specific situations and don't paint the whole military with the same brush. Don't work to make the enemies job easier by making things sound worse than they are.
Quote "I don't agree with this line of thinking. Typically, when speeding isn't enforced, it's for a reason -- the officer realizes that if the person is going over the speed limit, but is driving responsibly -- staying in the center of their lane, not constantly changing lanes and cutting people off -- they're not a danger. The danger comes from people who drive aggressively, and these people are threatening at any speed. Speeding laws provide a pretext to pull these people over, because "he thought I was driving too aggressively" is debatable in court due to its subjectivity. "My radar clocked him going 10 miles over the speed limit," however, is much harder to refute."
This attitude is exactly what is wrong with this country. Laws are enforced when convenient, whether it is traffic or drug use or financial accountability. Law makers rush to pass new laws when something bad happens. They do this in spite of the fact that there were already laws in place to prevent the bad thing from happening.
I am a long haul truck driver. Granted, not everyone who drives a truck does it as they are supposed to. However, I drive according to the laws that govern my vehicle operation. I have all kinds of things to deal with that I don't like. There are split speed limits, where trucks have to travel 5-20 MPH slower than cars. These laws are not safe, yet I don't have the luxury of choosing the laws I wish to obey. I don't care if you feel that the roads that are governed at 55 MPH can be safely traveled at 70 MPH. That is not your decision to make. Personally I don't care how they nail you for speeding as long as the laws are enforced. If there is a problem with the law, law abiding folks should stand up and make an effort to change the law.
Civil disobedience may be a way of getting attention, but don't tell me or anyone else that your speeding is civil disobedience. It is simply selfishness. You don't have time to do the right thing and the cops aren't watching so stay out of my way. As long as that is the prevalent attitude, my attitude will continue to be: "Nail em any way you can".
There has been a lot of mention of off the shelf parts. This doesn't work for a commercial security system however. Anything that is used for genuine loss prevention has to meet legal standards. You have to have a recording that will stand up in court. VHS is an accepted standard, courts will uphold it. Digital gets tricky. One of the things that is needed for digital, even though there is little case law on the point, is some sort of watermark that can authenticate the video.
That part of things is still tough. The issue with digital is that it is very easy to alter images. This is why the courts are more reluctant to allow digital. In the mean time, if you want a digital video system, you should visit a reputable security professional. They already are dealing with exactly these issues and can help you determine what is right for your needs. They can also give you the pros and cons of various systems.
All this being said, I am neither a lawyer nor a sales rep. I have worked in security for over 5 years and have researched such systems many times. If you have any fear that you may need to take your footage to court, make sure it will stand up.
I would like to take a minute and agree with the above post. While I certainly don't condone or approve of what the Taliban is doing, has done or will do, I can't call it Islam. I am a Christian living in the US. This means I am supposed to believe that all those of Islamic persuation are evil killers that want to wipe out all who are not Islam. I see this in the news, in the movies, and in everyday conversation when this subject comes up. But I have also worked with a number of Islamic people. Every one of these have been very nice, extremely tolerent, and shhow their faith in such a way that most Christians should be ashamed.
Does this mean I think that Islam is the one true religeon? No. But it also isn't what western media portrays it as. Many things in the past (and I'm sure in the present) have been done in the name of Christianity. These are things that no real Christian could ever condone. The Salem Witch Trials in Massacheutes in the 1600's come to mind. Like many, I am guilty of forgetting the crimes preformed in the name of that which I support.
My point is simply that the Taliban may use Islamic teachings to justify what they do. That doesn't mean that those teachings are being interpreted and passed on correctly. From my experience, Islam is one of the most toleratent and accepting of religeons and it is about time that the western world woke up to that fact.
Why do people insist on confusing proper nutrition and low calorie intake as if they are mutually exclusive concepts? Americans in general eat MUCH more then is required, but much of it does not take into account proper nutrition. Were we to eat less, but of the right foods this is a very sound theory.
The fact of the matter is, Americans specifically, don't eat healthy. We just eat.
-KATN
The weight isn't as big an issue as you may think. The Geo Metro of the late 80's was only about 1680 pounds. Yeah, you would feel it when a truck roared by, but it wasn't a challenge to hold your lane in it.
I have not read the articles in question, nor all the comments that followed. One impression I have received from reading the article posted this morning as well as many of the comments posted would indicate that the "Copyrighted material" was not simply reproduced for editorial purposes. It sounds to me like there was discussion on how to bypass something. To me that sounds as if Microsoft has a legitiment complaint.
That being said, I am no great fan of Microsoft. I think that many of their business practices are plain wrong. However, Copyrights do exist and should be honored. There may be things which should not be copyrighted, but until a court says otherwise I am inclined to side with the holder of the copyright.
On the other hand, if the material quoted was quoted in a strictly editorial sense, then there is no problem that I see.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is it that everyone refuses believe the CIA until they say something that they really want to believe? Those on the right don't believe the CIA until they say there are WMDs in Iraq and those on the left don't believe them until they say Plame was indeed undercover?
Why does anyone without a security clearance high enough to see all the relevant information on a given subject believe anything the CIA has to say?
As a truck driver, my cell phone is almost a necessity. I do take time to myself where my phone is turned off, much to the annoyance of my dispatcher. That is his problem, he doesn't pay my phone bill. When I go in to eat, my phone is off. When I go to sleep, the phone is off. When I am securing my cargo, the phone is in the truck.
I carry a phone all the time, I just decide when it is turned on. It is no more a leash than anything else I use.
You make this sound like everything here was on the up and up right up until it got to court. You are talking about ballots that are just now being found 7 weeks after the election. I am not saying that all of these ballots are fraudulent, but since you can no longer verify the chain of custody on these ballots how can you say that these ballots are legitiment.
The case of new ballots in King County, Washington is looking more and more like fraud. Everytime the Democrat canidate falls further behind, King County suddenly finds more ballots. This may be incompetency, but the more ballots keep getting getting found 2 months after the election the more it looks like fraud. A recount is supposed to count ballots already counted, not give the losing side time to manufacture new ones.
There is no denying that what happened at Abu Ghraib was horrible and disgraceful. However, what happened was more than likely the actions of less than 20 out of over 250,000. I make no excuses for what happened. I do not justify it. I do think there are too many of you who have never served in the armed forces and assume that everyone who has gone through basic training is automatically a controlled automaton. In most cases those who are in the military are stable and do as they are trained to do. The military is not, and probably never will be, immune to having rogues who will find a way to do things their own way.
There are too many people who are of the opinion that we should never have gone to Iraq. That is fine, they are entitled to that opinion. However, these people take it a step further by condemning anything that happens there if it happens to hurt someone. It doesn't seem to matter what those people have done, our people are wrong. The problem is that this does not help the situation. Everyone wants our troops home as soon as possible. Bringing them home before we have done what we can to stablize that area would make all the suffering on both sides a complete waste. I am not saying that the area can be stabilized, but we haven't been there long enough yet to make that determination.
I am not saying that anyone has to agree with everything that happens over there. But please, limit your complaints to specific situations and don't paint the whole military with the same brush. Don't work to make the enemies job easier by making things sound worse than they are.
Quote "I don't agree with this line of thinking. Typically, when speeding isn't enforced, it's for a reason -- the officer realizes that if the person is going over the speed limit, but is driving responsibly -- staying in the center of their lane, not constantly changing lanes and cutting people off -- they're not a danger. The danger comes from people who drive aggressively, and these people are threatening at any speed. Speeding laws provide a pretext to pull these people over, because "he thought I was driving too aggressively" is debatable in court due to its subjectivity. "My radar clocked him going 10 miles over the speed limit," however, is much harder to refute."
This attitude is exactly what is wrong with this country. Laws are enforced when convenient, whether it is traffic or drug use or financial accountability. Law makers rush to pass new laws when something bad happens. They do this in spite of the fact that there were already laws in place to prevent the bad thing from happening.
I am a long haul truck driver. Granted, not everyone who drives a truck does it as they are supposed to. However, I drive according to the laws that govern my vehicle operation. I have all kinds of things to deal with that I don't like. There are split speed limits, where trucks have to travel 5-20 MPH slower than cars. These laws are not safe, yet I don't have the luxury of choosing the laws I wish to obey. I don't care if you feel that the roads that are governed at 55 MPH can be safely traveled at 70 MPH. That is not your decision to make. Personally I don't care how they nail you for speeding as long as the laws are enforced. If there is a problem with the law, law abiding folks should stand up and make an effort to change the law.
Civil disobedience may be a way of getting attention, but don't tell me or anyone else that your speeding is civil disobedience. It is simply selfishness. You don't have time to do the right thing and the cops aren't watching so stay out of my way. As long as that is the prevalent attitude, my attitude will continue to be: "Nail em any way you can".
Gee, sounds like the same attitude that killed off how many untold 'natives' because explorers didn't think there was any harm going in.
There has been a lot of mention of off the shelf parts. This doesn't work for a commercial security system however. Anything that is used for genuine loss prevention has to meet legal standards. You have to have a recording that will stand up in court. VHS is an accepted standard, courts will uphold it. Digital gets tricky. One of the things that is needed for digital, even though there is little case law on the point, is some sort of watermark that can authenticate the video.
That part of things is still tough. The issue with digital is that it is very easy to alter images. This is why the courts are more reluctant to allow digital. In the mean time, if you want a digital video system, you should visit a reputable security professional. They already are dealing with exactly these issues and can help you determine what is right for your needs. They can also give you the pros and cons of various systems.
All this being said, I am neither a lawyer nor a sales rep. I have worked in security for over 5 years and have researched such systems many times. If you have any fear that you may need to take your footage to court, make sure it will stand up.
Scott Boersema
I would like to take a minute and agree with the above post. While I certainly don't condone or approve of what the Taliban is doing, has done or will do, I can't call it Islam. I am a Christian living in the US. This means I am supposed to believe that all those of Islamic persuation are evil killers that want to wipe out all who are not Islam. I see this in the news, in the movies, and in everyday conversation when this subject comes up. But I have also worked with a number of Islamic people. Every one of these have been very nice, extremely tolerent, and shhow their faith in such a way that most Christians should be ashamed.
Does this mean I think that Islam is the one true religeon? No. But it also isn't what western media portrays it as. Many things in the past (and I'm sure in the present) have been done in the name of Christianity. These are things that no real Christian could ever condone. The Salem Witch Trials in Massacheutes in the 1600's come to mind. Like many, I am guilty of forgetting the crimes preformed in the name of that which I support.
My point is simply that the Taliban may use Islamic teachings to justify what they do. That doesn't mean that those teachings are being interpreted and passed on correctly. From my experience, Islam is one of the most toleratent and accepting of religeons and it is about time that the western world woke up to that fact.
Why do people insist on confusing proper nutrition and low calorie intake as if they are mutually exclusive concepts? Americans in general eat MUCH more then is required, but much of it does not take into account proper nutrition. Were we to eat less, but of the right foods this is a very sound theory. The fact of the matter is, Americans specifically, don't eat healthy. We just eat. -KATN
The weight isn't as big an issue as you may think. The Geo Metro of the late 80's was only about 1680 pounds. Yeah, you would feel it when a truck roared by, but it wasn't a challenge to hold your lane in it.
That being said, I am no great fan of Microsoft. I think that many of their business practices are plain wrong. However, Copyrights do exist and should be honored. There may be things which should not be copyrighted, but until a court says otherwise I am inclined to side with the holder of the copyright.
On the other hand, if the material quoted was quoted in a strictly editorial sense, then there is no problem that I see.