If I were going to do something like this I'd do it from a public wifi point. My university runs one, at least, that has public unencrypted wifi that is port filtered.
The only ports you can access are 80, 110, skype, a few others, and... ssh.
SB1070 was written by representatives of the prison industry, and documents have surfaced saying that one motivation for its design was to increase incarceration rates.
What's the death penalty have to do with anything? Red herring alert.
Advocating replacing all sentences of execution with sentences of life in prison has nothing at all to do with the course of imprisonment for the vast majority of inmates. It certainly has nothing at all to do with rehabilitation, since by definition we have given up on rehabilitation of people who are executed or imprisoned for life.
Your rant is spot on. Unfortunately, shouting about being "tough on crime" leads to getting elected, which leads to the "lock them in jail and make jail Hell on Earth" attitude.
Of course, that does nothing to actually rehabilitate criminals or actually reduce crime -- it just makes you look good come election time. Combine that with a prison system that mostly exists to increase its own profits (q.v. Arizona SB1070) and you've got a recipe for disaster.
I used to have a Panasonic digital camera, of the "superzoom" type. The lens (which had the fastest aperture of any superzoom lens available) incorporated anomalous-dispersion glass and was well-designed, and thus had pretty low levels of chromatic aberration; the residual chromatic aberration had been characterized by the lens designer and was cleaned up in software in the camera. For what it was, it took amazing pictures.
Sony made a competing product. It had all sorts of shiny stuff advertised on the box -- lots of megapixels, various gee-whiz modes, "smile shutter", all sorts of stuff that can be marketed -- but the lens was *shit*, with nutty amounts of chromatic aberration, so it didn't matter what you did with it -- you weren't going to take good pictures at the long end of that lens, gee-whiz stuff or no, because the lens sucked.
If there were a chopper flying around the neighborhood, and I knew the local drug lord, I'd call him and tell him I'd have sex on my roof for $20 to distract the chopper.
And I've known plenty of people in Maricopa County and Sierra Vista (which while geographically separated sort of have the same attitude) who say that illegals are a problem because this one guy said illegals are a problem, who says illegals are a problem because Glenn Beck (or Joe Arpaio) did.
Drug smugglers are a very small part of Mexicans. Yes, the Mexican drug war is seriously bad shit, and violent smugglers and gang-bangers have no business in our country. The Mexicans are as fed up with those folks as we are.
The point is, there are already laws against that. There's no reason to conflate the majority of Mexican immigrants, legal and illegal, who are peaceful folks who just want the same things that citizens want, with a violent criminal enterprise.
They've got nothing in common except their country of origin.
Actually, I'd wager that the burden on the health care system from indigent ER abuse from inner-city black populations in Atlanta or Los Angeles is worse than the burden on our ER's from Mexicans.
And, if you'd offer these folks a path to citizenship, they'd be more able to participate in the economy and pay for health care like everyone else.
There's an excellent hospital near where I live (the place that they're treating Gabrielle Giffords, actually), and the last time I was there (in the ER at night) it was mostly drunk fraternity/sorority members, not Mexicans.
1) That's not going to be cheap. Steel is expensive. Claymores are expensive. 2) That's not going to be effective. I can think of ten ways to get around that if you want to cross.
You'll kill a lot of vultures, coyotes, bobcats, deer, and javelina though.
The people making a stink about "onoz illegals!" IMO don't know what they're talking about. I live near the border (Tucson, AZ), and all these horrible problems created by the dirty Mexicans just... aren't there.
Yes, there is some crime associated with drug smuggling; yes, there is a higher crime rate among the poor. But it's better among the Hispanic community here than in many other populations of non-immigrants.
Why should he be all that concerned about US civics and history and politics? What's relevant to him is that he has business reasons to travel to the US, for purposes that benefit both the US and his home country (and the world at large), and the US' draconian security makes it difficult for him to do so. It's not really relevant *why* we have dumbshit rules; it's not an excuse that "we have this stupid rules on air travel because our political system is dysfunctional."
I've been to China on business, and the security measures for air travel there are far more innocuous than the ones in the US. Metal detector, infrared camera (this was during H1N1), simple xray machine, and you're good to go. A Chinese or a Russian wanting to come to the US has to endure far more indignity in order to come to conferences.
It's to the point where a lot of foreign scientists grumble whenever the international conference is in the US, because they have to put up with our bullshit.
Your first sentence indicates that you are a reactionary asshole who's not gotten out of the 19th century in time for the 21st. Just skimmed the rest, and it confirmed that first impression.
Perhaps I'm old fashioned, but I would allow my students to use numerical algorithms that are as sophisticated as they want -- provided that they wrote all the code themselves and require nothing more than the functions in math.h to compile.
Hell, it might not even be a good idea to let them use that -- make them write sin, cos, etc., from scratch. That way we might actually get students to understand what a Taylor series is good for.
Don't most of those states also have a rule that if A notifies B that A is recording their conversation, and B consents, then B is also allowed to record the conversation?
Seems like if the cops want to use two-party wiretapping laws against the citizenry then they shouldn't be able to record either -- and that includes an open radio loop.
No officer should be convicted of anything based on a video taken out of context. If a video taken out of context shows a cop appearing to do something illegal when he's really not, then he can explain it to the judge and jury during his trial, and if his explanation makes sense, he will be acquitted. If the person who made that recording did so maliciously, then the officer can sue for libel.
Why should the police have extra protections against false prosecutions beyond what every citizen has?
They can't legally compel them, but they can "request convincingly", I imagine. Does this mean that if the police ask my ISP for my email and my ISP hands the records over without a warrant, any evidence gotten that way is inadmissible? Does it mean I can sue my ISP?
In a physical search, anyone living in a house can consent to a search of the property. Can Comcast voluntarily consent to a search of their customers' email?
Yes, although I have less firsthand experience with it. But I know a little about stats as a physicist, and I've seen some stats presented in medical studies that are *impossible* -- things like chisquared/d.o.f. consistently less than unity, which only happens if you are fudging things (or overestimating your errors).
Slashdot Mirror
... yet the reason he was caught is that he bragged about it, not that he was traced.
If I were going to do something like this I'd do it from a public wifi point. My university runs one, at least, that has public unencrypted wifi that is port filtered.
The only ports you can access are 80, 110, skype, a few others, and ... ssh.
What's "peckerwood" refer to? I've only heard it as a humorous transposition of "woodpecker".
The trouble is this "natural law" thing.
I see no mention of "rights", or even of living things, in any of the fundamental natural laws:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_field_theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroweak_interaction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_chromodynamics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity
What do you mean by "natural law"?
I've seen US military propaganda all over the place, targeted at US citizens...
Two-way communications are much harder, and can quite often require physical presence in the airspace of the defender.
Getting signals into Egypt is easy. Getting them out is hard.
SB1070 was written by representatives of the prison industry, and documents have surfaced saying that one motivation for its design was to increase incarceration rates.
What's the death penalty have to do with anything? Red herring alert.
Advocating replacing all sentences of execution with sentences of life in prison has nothing at all to do with the course of imprisonment for the vast majority of inmates. It certainly has nothing at all to do with rehabilitation, since by definition we have given up on rehabilitation of people who are executed or imprisoned for life.
Your rant is spot on. Unfortunately, shouting about being "tough on crime" leads to getting elected, which leads to the "lock them in jail and make jail Hell on Earth" attitude.
Of course, that does nothing to actually rehabilitate criminals or actually reduce crime -- it just makes you look good come election time. Combine that with a prison system that mostly exists to increase its own profits (q.v. Arizona SB1070) and you've got a recipe for disaster.
Panasonic, for one.
I used to have a Panasonic digital camera, of the "superzoom" type. The lens (which had the fastest aperture of any superzoom lens available) incorporated anomalous-dispersion glass and was well-designed, and thus had pretty low levels of chromatic aberration; the residual chromatic aberration had been characterized by the lens designer and was cleaned up in software in the camera. For what it was, it took amazing pictures.
Sony made a competing product. It had all sorts of shiny stuff advertised on the box -- lots of megapixels, various gee-whiz modes, "smile shutter", all sorts of stuff that can be marketed -- but the lens was *shit*, with nutty amounts of chromatic aberration, so it didn't matter what you did with it -- you weren't going to take good pictures at the long end of that lens, gee-whiz stuff or no, because the lens sucked.
If there were a chopper flying around the neighborhood, and I knew the local drug lord, I'd call him and tell him I'd have sex on my roof for $20 to distract the chopper.
And I've known plenty of people in Maricopa County and Sierra Vista (which while geographically separated sort of have the same attitude) who say that illegals are a problem because this one guy said illegals are a problem, who says illegals are a problem because Glenn Beck (or Joe Arpaio) did.
Drug smugglers are a very small part of Mexicans. Yes, the Mexican drug war is seriously bad shit, and violent smugglers and gang-bangers have no business in our country. The Mexicans are as fed up with those folks as we are.
The point is, there are already laws against that. There's no reason to conflate the majority of Mexican immigrants, legal and illegal, who are peaceful folks who just want the same things that citizens want, with a violent criminal enterprise.
They've got nothing in common except their country of origin.
Not specifically because they're illegal, no.
Actually, I'd wager that the burden on the health care system from indigent ER abuse from inner-city black populations in Atlanta or Los Angeles is worse than the burden on our ER's from Mexicans.
And, if you'd offer these folks a path to citizenship, they'd be more able to participate in the economy and pay for health care like everyone else.
There's an excellent hospital near where I live (the place that they're treating Gabrielle Giffords, actually), and the last time I was there (in the ER at night) it was mostly drunk fraternity/sorority members, not Mexicans.
1) That's not going to be cheap. Steel is expensive. Claymores are expensive.
2) That's not going to be effective. I can think of ten ways to get around that if you want to cross.
You'll kill a lot of vultures, coyotes, bobcats, deer, and javelina though.
This, exactly.
The people making a stink about "onoz illegals!" IMO don't know what they're talking about. I live near the border (Tucson, AZ), and all these horrible problems created by the dirty Mexicans just ... aren't there.
Yes, there is some crime associated with drug smuggling; yes, there is a higher crime rate among the poor. But it's better among the Hispanic community here than in many other populations of non-immigrants.
Er, what? He didn't even say where he is from.
Why should he be all that concerned about US civics and history and politics? What's relevant to him is that he has business reasons to travel to the US, for purposes that benefit both the US and his home country (and the world at large), and the US' draconian security makes it difficult for him to do so. It's not really relevant *why* we have dumbshit rules; it's not an excuse that "we have this stupid rules on air travel because our political system is dysfunctional."
I've been to China on business, and the security measures for air travel there are far more innocuous than the ones in the US. Metal detector, infrared camera (this was during H1N1), simple xray machine, and you're good to go. A Chinese or a Russian wanting to come to the US has to endure far more indignity in order to come to conferences.
It's to the point where a lot of foreign scientists grumble whenever the international conference is in the US, because they have to put up with our bullshit.
No kidding.
A bunch of Anons using tor/skype to make anonymous tips could cause a *lot* of ruckus.
So could a bunch of al-Qaeda. Why bother making bombs and killing yourselves to disrupt American air travel when all you need is a computer?
Your first sentence indicates that you are a reactionary asshole who's not gotten out of the 19th century in time for the 21st. Just skimmed the rest, and it confirmed that first impression.
Perhaps I'm old fashioned, but I would allow my students to use numerical algorithms that are as sophisticated as they want -- provided that they wrote all the code themselves and require nothing more than the functions in math.h to compile.
Hell, it might not even be a good idea to let them use that -- make them write sin, cos, etc., from scratch. That way we might actually get students to understand what a Taylor series is good for.
Don't most of those states also have a rule that if A notifies B that A is recording their conversation, and B consents, then B is also allowed to record the conversation?
Seems like if the cops want to use two-party wiretapping laws against the citizenry then they shouldn't be able to record either -- and that includes an open radio loop.
No officer should be convicted of anything based on a video taken out of context. If a video taken out of context shows a cop appearing to do something illegal when he's really not, then he can explain it to the judge and jury during his trial, and if his explanation makes sense, he will be acquitted. If the person who made that recording did so maliciously, then the officer can sue for libel.
Why should the police have extra protections against false prosecutions beyond what every citizen has?
They can't legally compel them, but they can "request convincingly", I imagine. Does this mean that if the police ask my ISP for my email and my ISP hands the records over without a warrant, any evidence gotten that way is inadmissible? Does it mean I can sue my ISP?
In a physical search, anyone living in a house can consent to a search of the property. Can Comcast voluntarily consent to a search of their customers' email?
tbh I'd rather have the bobcat. Lots of things you can do with a bobcat.
Yes, although I have less firsthand experience with it. But I know a little about stats as a physicist, and I've seen some stats presented in medical studies that are *impossible* -- things like chisquared/d.o.f. consistently less than unity, which only happens if you are fudging things (or overestimating your errors).