Whenever I read about someone being caught with 100,000 child porn images, I always imagine it's about ten actual child porn images... and 99,990-ish pics they got by putting 'children' into google image search and spending weeks saving anything they like.
Also, how would you get customers? You can't advertise openly, and those customers don't want to be found. For that matter, how do pedophiles find each other? Anything that could be found on google would be watched by the law already, and you can't go by word of mouth when it's not safe to even express an interest.
It's just part of the long police tradition: If they strongly suspect someone of a crime, they'll set out to find evidence of a crime. Not always that crime, but anything will do that they can convict for. Given that almost everyone has done something illegal, it works. I think the most famous example is Al Capone: The police were confident he was involved with organised crime, but they could never prove it in court. Capone was too good, too cautious. So a new plan was found - investigate him for something, anything, that could be used to convict him. That turned out to be tax evasion.
It's much the same situation with pedophiles now. Police suspect someone, but can't prove it? Then search. Raid their house, search their computer, audit their bank account. Maybe the investigation will find hidden drugs, or some Rule 34 art, or suggestive photos that would be fine for anyone else, or a tiny violation of a probation order, or involvement in online piracy, or financial irregularity.
People who go for a career in law enforcement don't just do it for the chance to abuse power. They want to bring justice to the world, protect society from evildoers - and that is just what they'll do. It's easy for them to start regarding things like legal rights or fair trials as a hinderence - just inconveniences that let criminal scum walk free. So it's not surprising that they'll often stoop to very low measures to secure a conviction.
I can't imagine any definition by which targeted taxes on salt, transfats and sugar could be considered a form of thoughtcrimes legislation. If you want a better example from the political left, you should have gone for something at least vaguely related. Regardless, your lack of thought suggests you are just looking for a chance to inject some political insults. I give you only one troll-point out of ten.
You can do a directional, steerable antenna with no moving parts using software radio and an array. But it'd still be impractical for phones - too big, and it'd take even more power. Perhaps at the base stations it might be of more use. The better the SNR you recieve by excluding sources of interference, the less power the phone needs to transmit. With an array and the right software, a base station could have a thousand virtual directional antennea, all turning to track an individual handset in real time.
A lot of that art is collected for novelty value - rule 34 is funny. There is just something entertaining in seeing the contrast of character and situation. Espicially when tentacles are involved.
You don't need help. You've got enough nuclear weapons to purge whole countries of anything larger than an insect. Even if the US were to lose every tank, fighter, soldier and surface warship, they'd be safe from invasion - no country is so stupid as to try it, and if any do they'll be glass in a week. On the downside, without the US's massive army to offer protection, many allied countries would be in a far weaker position. Israel in particular.
I'm guessing organisations like Perverted Justice. Do-gooders who decided it is their duty to rid the world of child porn and those who distribute it. Perhaps well-intentioned, but like most vigilantee organisations there is a tendency for them to get carried away at times - their over-eagerness to use flimsy evidence and lack of legal knowledge often make it impossible to convict those suspects they accuse, and they have been known to dish out 'justice' themselves without trial by DDoSing websites or publicly identifying suspects when they judge the police to have failed.
By which it probably means about ten actual images of child abuse, and 100,000 images from clothing catalogs and whatever they can find on flickr. When you're collecting something so rare as child porn, standards are going to have to be quite low. Remember that the law enforcement has a very strong motivation to exagerate (Public admiration, increased funding, personal promotion and bonuses) and the media just as much (More fear = more viewers = more money), and that there is no possibility of verifying any claims because the siezed collection is obviously not going to be released for independant inspection.
I would imaging the producers wouldn't be the ones profiting. That would be the very small number of pay sites (I know they must exist, as viewers have been caught before via financial records). The usual rule of data being worthless because it's easily coppied don't apply here, because it's just so hot - it's not like you can just throw it on a p2p network. If you want it, you need to know where to get it, and pay-sites could make a bit of money as brokers. Still, the market must be absolutly tiny, and profits accordingly tiny.
Even those who originated the name dihydrogen hydroxide know it's wrong. It was picked out for the 'monoxide' part, and it's simularity to scareygas carbon monoxide. It just sounds more worrying then hydroxide.
It's even sillier than that, really. Most countries now seem to have banned even 'simulated' child porn - photoshop jobs, drawn artwork, even fiction. Why? Because it makes people feel squicky.
I still don't think there is any real definition for what 'cloud' means. As far as I can gather it's just fancy new marketing-speak for the very old idea of putting things on a server - the only difference is that with the cloud, you don't have to care about the server's physical location.
$3000/yr? Sweatshop workers can dream. I don't know what the rates are in technology, but in clothing manufacture I know from a scandal back in 2008 that they'll pay roughly 60p a day, or a little over $200/yr assuming no holidays. There is a reason Chinese-made products are so cheap. I could bribe one of them with my pocket change.
True. Apple's strength is in the branding. Their business isn't that different from, for example, a fashion house. People will buy $200 branded trainers even though the $30 unbranded ones are just as good. The only way an apple knockoff will compete with apple is if it's an outright counterfeit, right down to the Apple logo.
The $30 trainers in this case would be Android devices - just as good, and a whole lot cheaper.
I wouldn't be too hard. Yes, they screwed up - but a bug like that could easily slip through testing, as it might only occur on extreme-sized data sets. Their real screwup was in not noticing right away and reverting to the previous config.
Isn't that exactly the same thing? If you want to make money, you place cameras where people most often speed. If you want to prevent high-speed accidents... just the same.
Why not? It's got to have gyros on board to aim the thing anyway. All you've got to do is turn it off, reorientate and turn on. I wasn't thinking of a building-incinerating death ray, just something that would cause substations and telephone exchanges to fail and so could be used to disrupt communications. Not a lot of good against insurgents, but very useful in a conventional country-v-country war. All the economic disruption of bombing a capital city, with none of the direct casualties.
It probably would be cheaper, for another reason. Both NASA and the ISS are very, very careful with the safety of their astronauts. Everything is triply-redundant or more. Everything has a procedure. Every last bolt is tested and retested, and then tested again by someone else. China, though... well, they'd probably consider their people a bit more expendable. If the rocket crashes, just send up another. Plenty more crew where those came from, and with their media control and non-democratic government they don't have to worry so much about public outrage.
Slashdot Mirror
Whenever I read about someone being caught with 100,000 child porn images, I always imagine it's about ten actual child porn images... and 99,990-ish pics they got by putting 'children' into google image search and spending weeks saving anything they like.
Also, how would you get customers? You can't advertise openly, and those customers don't want to be found. For that matter, how do pedophiles find each other? Anything that could be found on google would be watched by the law already, and you can't go by word of mouth when it's not safe to even express an interest.
It's just part of the long police tradition: If they strongly suspect someone of a crime, they'll set out to find evidence of a crime. Not always that crime, but anything will do that they can convict for. Given that almost everyone has done something illegal, it works. I think the most famous example is Al Capone: The police were confident he was involved with organised crime, but they could never prove it in court. Capone was too good, too cautious. So a new plan was found - investigate him for something, anything, that could be used to convict him. That turned out to be tax evasion.
It's much the same situation with pedophiles now. Police suspect someone, but can't prove it? Then search. Raid their house, search their computer, audit their bank account. Maybe the investigation will find hidden drugs, or some Rule 34 art, or suggestive photos that would be fine for anyone else, or a tiny violation of a probation order, or involvement in online piracy, or financial irregularity.
People who go for a career in law enforcement don't just do it for the chance to abuse power. They want to bring justice to the world, protect society from evildoers - and that is just what they'll do. It's easy for them to start regarding things like legal rights or fair trials as a hinderence - just inconveniences that let criminal scum walk free. So it's not surprising that they'll often stoop to very low measures to secure a conviction.
I can't imagine any definition by which targeted taxes on salt, transfats and sugar could be considered a form of thoughtcrimes legislation. If you want a better example from the political left, you should have gone for something at least vaguely related. Regardless, your lack of thought suggests you are just looking for a chance to inject some political insults. I give you only one troll-point out of ten.
I found two things will drain my phone quickly: Angry Birds and ebuddy. The latter I assume because it keeps the radio on continually.
You can do a directional, steerable antenna with no moving parts using software radio and an array. But it'd still be impractical for phones - too big, and it'd take even more power. Perhaps at the base stations it might be of more use. The better the SNR you recieve by excluding sources of interference, the less power the phone needs to transmit. With an array and the right software, a base station could have a thousand virtual directional antennea, all turning to track an individual handset in real time.
WANT!
Stareing into someone's eyes, you'll be able to see the porn they are viewing reflected off their cornea.
A lot of that art is collected for novelty value - rule 34 is funny. There is just something entertaining in seeing the contrast of character and situation. Espicially when tentacles are involved.
You don't need help. You've got enough nuclear weapons to purge whole countries of anything larger than an insect. Even if the US were to lose every tank, fighter, soldier and surface warship, they'd be safe from invasion - no country is so stupid as to try it, and if any do they'll be glass in a week. On the downside, without the US's massive army to offer protection, many allied countries would be in a far weaker position. Israel in particular.
I'm guessing organisations like Perverted Justice. Do-gooders who decided it is their duty to rid the world of child porn and those who distribute it. Perhaps well-intentioned, but like most vigilantee organisations there is a tendency for them to get carried away at times - their over-eagerness to use flimsy evidence and lack of legal knowledge often make it impossible to convict those suspects they accuse, and they have been known to dish out 'justice' themselves without trial by DDoSing websites or publicly identifying suspects when they judge the police to have failed.
By which it probably means about ten actual images of child abuse, and 100,000 images from clothing catalogs and whatever they can find on flickr. When you're collecting something so rare as child porn, standards are going to have to be quite low. Remember that the law enforcement has a very strong motivation to exagerate (Public admiration, increased funding, personal promotion and bonuses) and the media just as much (More fear = more viewers = more money), and that there is no possibility of verifying any claims because the siezed collection is obviously not going to be released for independant inspection.
I would imaging the producers wouldn't be the ones profiting. That would be the very small number of pay sites (I know they must exist, as viewers have been caught before via financial records). The usual rule of data being worthless because it's easily coppied don't apply here, because it's just so hot - it's not like you can just throw it on a p2p network. If you want it, you need to know where to get it, and pay-sites could make a bit of money as brokers. Still, the market must be absolutly tiny, and profits accordingly tiny.
Even those who originated the name dihydrogen hydroxide know it's wrong. It was picked out for the 'monoxide' part, and it's simularity to scareygas carbon monoxide. It just sounds more worrying then hydroxide.
Hexane? Also, I gather the most 'correct' name would be hydrogen hydroxide.
It's even sillier than that, really. Most countries now seem to have banned even 'simulated' child porn - photoshop jobs, drawn artwork, even fiction. Why? Because it makes people feel squicky.
I still don't think there is any real definition for what 'cloud' means. As far as I can gather it's just fancy new marketing-speak for the very old idea of putting things on a server - the only difference is that with the cloud, you don't have to care about the server's physical location.
America does indeed have some human rights issues. But it's abuses pale to insignificence beside those of China, or quite a number of other countries.
$3000/yr? Sweatshop workers can dream. I don't know what the rates are in technology, but in clothing manufacture I know from a scandal back in 2008 that they'll pay roughly 60p a day, or a little over $200/yr assuming no holidays. There is a reason Chinese-made products are so cheap. I could bribe one of them with my pocket change.
True. Apple's strength is in the branding. Their business isn't that different from, for example, a fashion house. People will buy $200 branded trainers even though the $30 unbranded ones are just as good. The only way an apple knockoff will compete with apple is if it's an outright counterfeit, right down to the Apple logo.
The $30 trainers in this case would be Android devices - just as good, and a whole lot cheaper.
That's what differentials are for.
I wouldn't be too hard. Yes, they screwed up - but a bug like that could easily slip through testing, as it might only occur on extreme-sized data sets. Their real screwup was in not noticing right away and reverting to the previous config.
Isn't that exactly the same thing? If you want to make money, you place cameras where people most often speed. If you want to prevent high-speed accidents... just the same.
Why not? It's got to have gyros on board to aim the thing anyway. All you've got to do is turn it off, reorientate and turn on. I wasn't thinking of a building-incinerating death ray, just something that would cause substations and telephone exchanges to fail and so could be used to disrupt communications. Not a lot of good against insurgents, but very useful in a conventional country-v-country war. All the economic disruption of bombing a capital city, with none of the direct casualties.
https://www.royalsupplies.com/templates/searchnf.cfm?zq=65328103&globaldesc=na&rowstart=1&wherefrom=PICTURE&whichord=7649018&subclass=MAN&subname=Manual%20Typewriters&department=TYP&special=R&class=N&nextprev=0&nextrow=!&prevrow=ZZZZZZ&desc=na&globaldesc=na&uas=N&tokns=passed&pagename=Online%20Store%20%3E%20Typewriters%20Personal%20Typewriters%20%3E%20%20%3E%20Manual%20Typewriters
They may have made them up until very recently, but they arn't selling them any more.
It probably would be cheaper, for another reason. Both NASA and the ISS are very, very careful with the safety of their astronauts. Everything is triply-redundant or more. Everything has a procedure. Every last bolt is tested and retested, and then tested again by someone else. China, though... well, they'd probably consider their people a bit more expendable. If the rocket crashes, just send up another. Plenty more crew where those came from, and with their media control and non-democratic government they don't have to worry so much about public outrage.