Most people don't lock their inside garage door and the bad guys know this.
Even if you do... the garage may be seen as a "great place to hide"
If the thieves happen to know you're on vacation, they can get into the garage with the remote code..
close the door behind them. Cut power to the opener...
And break-in at their leisure; using all the screwdrivers and power tools people often leave in their garage.
Another concern is that in the event the bad guy set off a burglar alarm; no worries -- all they have to do is hang tight, bide their time while they locate and destroy or cut all the cables on the control box, and the police will come and leave,
because; "Everything looks secure. No signs of forced entry. Looks like a false alarm."
Once the authorities have been away for 15 minutes, proceed, with noone the wiser.
Best to put a physical locking mechanism on that door that will require an assault that creates evidence of entry.
innumerable trade agreements between nations that mandate that foreign companies follow local legislation while doing business with their communities.
Sometimes trade agreements are only supported superficially, or only held up, until the foreign country's laws become inconvenient.
You flat out can NOT dictate that a company break a foreign country's laws.
That remains to be seen, doesn't it?
Some EU countries tried to have laws that certain data couldn't leave the EU. Last I checked... Microsoft is in the middle of a pitched battle they are on the verge of losing -- attempting to resist an order from US courts to transfer to the US and hand over data contrary to a foreign country's laws requiring data remain in the country.
A few months working with jQuery.... Events.... DOM on realistic websites, some fiddling with Prototype.js, and you'll be fine.
Thas' assuming you know programming in general, and not just Javascript, and had time to learn Javascript's language quirks, such as functions, variables, conditionals, ===, strings, integers, dates, custom objects, and basic structures.
And I suppose putting up a sign the "Blacks may not be served here" is still legal in the US?
You can put the sign up if your property is not a place of public accomdation, if you want.
But if you serve anyone there, then the sign is discrimination by intimidation.
Facebook may has well have a "Sikh may not be served here" on their home page.
No, they have not prevented Sikh from signing up and using their website.
They blocked pages associated with certain messages/content.
Unless shown otherwise, that had nothing to do with the race/religion of the people, only the race/religion associated with the message they were sending.
You're perfectly within your legal rights to hang a sign saying, "Blacks may not be served here".
You're likely to be sued and boycotted into oblivion. And you are likely to be ordered by the court to take it down.
Hanging such a sign intimidates individuals of a certain race.
You cannot discriminate by intimidating or dissuading individuals based on a protected class from receiving services in a place of public accommodation.
So a newspaper can refuse to run classified ads from a particular race or religion?
The newspaper can refuse to run a Pro-Muslim/Anti-Muslim, Pro-Christian, Anti-Christian, or Pro-Canadian advertisement based on the content of the ad; they can reject ads saying things positive or negative about a particular race or religion based on the content of the ad.
The newspaper cannot refuse to run an ad based on the race or religion of the person paying for the ad or requesting its placement.
In other words: they can discriminate against or in favor of any message they want.
As a provider of services accomadating the public, they are not allowed to discriminate based on protected traits of the individual applying to list an ad.
Because I'm pretty sure a US court has no legal jurisdiction to say a damned thing about WTF Facebook does in India.
Facebook is an American company. If you are a person or company based in the US or with an office or presence in the US, then the US claims jurisdiction over your worldwide activities.
Companies and individuals can and have been penalized for activities overseas.
For starters, if you earn income in another country, then you will be taxed on it in the US, with a credit offered only for taxes paid in the other country.
You can be sued under US law for activities against US law undertaken in another country.
HOWEVER, Facebook has 1st amendment rights, and therefore, it is perfectly within its rights to block any page it wants based on content.
You don't have a civil right to post whatever you want on Facebook, and for Facebook to display your posting.
They can apply social network based limitations on who can see it, they can apply regional limitations on who can see it, or they can delete/block the content altogether.
And it's Facebook's constitutional 1st amendment free speech right to do so, and control what messages they send, as this reflects on their company.
Doesn't matter if the suing party is a bona fide patent troll or a frivolous suit from a "legitimate" company.
Then why did you ask about defending themselves against patent trolls?
How likely is it that a legitimate company suing them is going to be in their same field and practicing their patents? It's extremely unlikely, that's for sure.
Acquiring a few BS patents is not a defense against patent trolls OR legitimate companies, instead you need MANY generic patents, like IBM or Microsoft has, if you expect to use patents as a defense, AND....
Khan Academy doesn't have that much money to defend itself against patent lawsuits, no matter who they come from.
Non-sequitur. The process of applying and going through the process and obtaining a full-blown patent is expensive, and you say they have little money for defense... that's just inconsistent with them getting a bunch of patents. This is a method of defense against would-be infringement lawsuits that is quite expensive, which could come from any source patent troll or legitimate company in ANY industry, not just your same industry.
Just having a patent provides no defense, if you cannot use it as a basis for suing your litigator.
If you want to make sure someone else doesn't patent your invention, then you just need to create a provisional patent or defensive publication, which doesn't involve many thousands of $$$ in application, research, and legal fees.
The only reason to obtain just a few patents concerning what you are doing is for generating revenue....
I don't know. But for sure, filing for your own patents does not protect against patent trolls.
It's not as if you can countersue a patent troll, as by definition: a troll is not an engineering business but a business centered around acquiring patents and generating revenue from them.
The only patent that would really defend against trolls would be a patent on patent trolling and methods thereof.
I thought KA benign, until they started getting patents.... it does not matter how benign they seem to be now, however, as the patents are not inherently tied to their current behavior which can change over time, And, moreover.... the possibility exists that the patents could change ownership in the future.
So what? You haven't contradicted any of my propositions.
There are many non-profit Educational organizations.
Just because they are non-profit does not mean that every activity they conduct or pursue is ultimately beneficial to the public.
The people who operate and govern a non-profit still get paid, And many non-profit educational organizations sell products or services; e.g. Just about every private and public college.
Non-profits also don't want competition, at least not direct competition within their specific niche. They still need revenue and recognition to fund their enterprise.
Also, schools do compete with one another for students and for donations.
At an organizational level; there are many schools whose administrations would favor kick out / make themselves the only university in a region, if they could get away with it / legally succeed at doing so.
I would encourage you to drop the "Non-Profit = Always good", "Profit = Evil" ideas.
In other words.... to help prevent competition / defend and prevent against someone else creating a competing service similar to Khan Academy that might take away some of Khan Academy's users, market share, or grant money and threaten KA staffs' ability to get paid.
Seeing as Tron: Legacy grossed $400 million and was considered a success, as 11th highest grossing film in 2010, then
I would say more than "four people" watched Tron 2.
And as someone else mentioned, if nothing shows up quickly enough, another "false flag" operation.
It's not necessary, and I think 9/11 was a real incident, not a false-flag.
However, 9/11 could have prevented, and laziness/incompetence plus a poor job done by intelligence agency staff and neglect of their reports by those in charge contributed to the unmitigated success of the attack.
That's all that needs to happen after Pat. act expires. Laziness or incompetence by the intelligence agencies resulting in failure to prevent an event that could and should easily be prevented based on available intelligence.
If they want to politicize this.... as Obama's administration has been seen to do in the past on some other issues such as "government shutdowns", when the program expires, the agencies can just start pretending "their hands are tied" and stop providing some vital intelligence; even some intelligence they were able to gather and did gather before Pat. act.
An event can happen from negligence in the form of inaction / failure to gather intelligence they should have gathered, or failing to act on intelligence and prevent occurence.
Then when the event happens, they'll claim the loss of Pat. act privileges to spy on ordinary 'mericans made their jobs unduly harder, and they "need the Pat. act" and more to do effective work.
this was obviously on someone's wet dream wish list (it was not so much written as released from the vaults)
There's probably an even better successor version of the law waiting in the vaults for the next event of a similar magnitude.
The intelligence agencies can just lay low for a few months; there's bound to be an event justifying uber-surveillance powers and a never-expiring new and improved version of patriot act that gives even more powers for surveillance of americans and casting dragnets and datamining + data fishing expeditions.
I think you missed out on a few things and underestimated the complexity of the law and of accounting (beyond simple bookkeeping/process execution)...
plastic pipes don't replace plumbers who are still needed to install them. You still need HVAC techs to do the install/replacement, and shipping 100 pounds of copper overseas, is insanely expensive.
I noticed you didn't put electricians in your list.
There's no plastic pipe solution you can buy to replace the need for a human to hook up your 120 / 240 volt circuits, troubleshoot wiring issues,
and repair / install service panels.
If there are currently fewer than 3 options for services in any areas they are proposing to merge or if their merger would drop the competition
Cable companies do not share their infrastructure, and they usually have exclusive "franchise" agreements with municipalities.
Are there actually any areas where buying service from your choice of Time Warner, or Charter was an option?
I believe this in the past has been the big cable co's argument that mergers between companies servicing different areas don't reduce competition.
They already have the monopoly..... the only way to switch is to move house.
Would anyone actually move house to switch cable carriers?
You're assuming there's gasoline in that primary or secondary gas tank, and it's not packed full of nitroglycerin, TNT, or high explosive charges instead.
This is called an "abundance of caution," and is perfectly understandable to anyone that hasn't been living under a rock for the last twenty years.
In 'abundance of caution' the police should tear open the trunk of any vehicle parked anywhere with a sealed trunk of any vehicle left unattended, since you can never be too sure there's not a pressure cooker in there, or god forbid.... some bags of fertilizer.
Were you paying attention to what two idiots did with pressure cookers in Boston a few years ago?
So if the idiots had put their stupid s*** in a laptop bag or suitcase, then you would say the cops should break into any car left unattended with a suitcase or laptop bag visible and detonate the bag?
Idiots do a lot of stupid things all the time with ordinary things.
That doesn't make mere ownership and display of one of the things some idiot or another has done some stupid thing with in the past a crime or probable cause for police invasion and excessive force in the unnecessary destruction of personal property.
There's not a current legitimate emergency situation that justifies the mass seizure or destruction of innocent people's pressure cookers.
Google fingered bad parenting for its lack of women techies.
More like: Google disagrees with their parenting.
Just because their values as parents didn't agree with your values today, Or your general desire to have more people in computer science,
in order to reduce wages, Or your desire to have more diversity among computer scientists to help you comply with
arbitrary government-imposed regulations on your employee population : does not make them bad parents.
He's not getting the book thrown at him in any of the media accounts I've read, he's getting the same treatment he would have received if he was pulled over for a routine traffic stop.
He wasn't driving at the time, and the miscarriage of justice is wanton and unnecessary destruction of valued personal property --- his vehicle, and his cookingware.
That doesn't mean cruising past the White House on this little road trip is a sensible decision, never mind parking nearby while I grab a bite to eat or take a few photos.
He didn't pack his car full of firearms and cruise past the Whitehouse.
It was a pressure cooker, and he left his car parked at the mall.
I don't know what shops are at the mall his car was found at, but I would imagine that they sell pressure cookers.
And these are ordinary cooking appliances, not weapons.... I would not be the least bit surprised for there to be many instances of people having left one in their car.
They are doing background checks likely, but not the store.... authorities are checking with retailers after purchase, by delivering orders to provide records of customers' purchases of certain items.
Slashdot Mirror
Most people don't lock their inside garage door and the bad guys know this.
Even if you do... the garage may be seen as a "great place to hide"
If the thieves happen to know you're on vacation, they can get into the garage with the remote code.. close the door behind them. Cut power to the opener...
And break-in at their leisure; using all the screwdrivers and power tools people often leave in their garage.
Another concern is that in the event the bad guy set off a burglar alarm; no worries -- all they have to do is hang tight, bide their time while they locate and destroy or cut all the cables on the control box, and the police will come and leave, because; "Everything looks secure. No signs of forced entry. Looks like a false alarm."
Once the authorities have been away for 15 minutes, proceed, with noone the wiser.
Best to put a physical locking mechanism on that door that will require an assault that creates evidence of entry.
Chromium is open source.... why not fork it and create your own version that doesn't disable NPAPI ?
innumerable trade agreements between nations that mandate that foreign companies follow local legislation while doing business with their communities.
Sometimes trade agreements are only supported superficially, or only held up, until the foreign country's laws become inconvenient.
You flat out can NOT dictate that a company break a foreign country's laws.
That remains to be seen, doesn't it?
Some EU countries tried to have laws that certain data couldn't leave the EU. Last I checked... Microsoft is in the middle of a pitched battle they are on the verge of losing -- attempting to resist an order from US courts to transfer to the US and hand over data contrary to a foreign country's laws requiring data remain in the country.
A few months working with jQuery.... Events.... DOM on realistic websites, some fiddling with Prototype.js, and you'll be fine.
Thas' assuming you know programming in general, and not just Javascript, and had time to learn Javascript's language quirks, such as functions, variables, conditionals, ===, strings, integers, dates, custom objects, and basic structures.
and there was a political push back then.
They screwed it up with posted signs that said things like:
Speed Limit:
40 Mph
64.3738 Km/h
And I suppose putting up a sign the "Blacks may not be served here" is still legal in the US?
You can put the sign up if your property is not a place of public accomdation, if you want. But if you serve anyone there, then the sign is discrimination by intimidation.
Facebook may has well have a "Sikh may not be served here" on their home page.
No, they have not prevented Sikh from signing up and using their website. They blocked pages associated with certain messages/content. Unless shown otherwise, that had nothing to do with the race/religion of the people, only the race/religion associated with the message they were sending.
You're perfectly within your legal rights to hang a sign saying, "Blacks may not be served here".
You're likely to be sued and boycotted into oblivion. And you are likely to be ordered by the court to take it down.
Hanging such a sign intimidates individuals of a certain race. You cannot discriminate by intimidating or dissuading individuals based on a protected class from receiving services in a place of public accommodation.
So a newspaper can refuse to run classified ads from a particular race or religion?
The newspaper can refuse to run a Pro-Muslim/Anti-Muslim, Pro-Christian, Anti-Christian, or Pro-Canadian advertisement based on the content of the ad; they can reject ads saying things positive or negative about a particular race or religion based on the content of the ad.
The newspaper cannot refuse to run an ad based on the race or religion of the person paying for the ad or requesting its placement.
In other words: they can discriminate against or in favor of any message they want.
As a provider of services accomadating the public, they are not allowed to discriminate based on protected traits of the individual applying to list an ad.
Because I'm pretty sure a US court has no legal jurisdiction to say a damned thing about WTF Facebook does in India.
Facebook is an American company. If you are a person or company based in the US or with an office or presence in the US, then the US claims jurisdiction over your worldwide activities.
Companies and individuals can and have been penalized for activities overseas.
For starters, if you earn income in another country, then you will be taxed on it in the US, with a credit offered only for taxes paid in the other country.
You can be sued under US law for activities against US law undertaken in another country.
HOWEVER, Facebook has 1st amendment rights, and therefore, it is perfectly within its rights to block any page it wants based on content.
You don't have a civil right to post whatever you want on Facebook, and for Facebook to display your posting.
They can apply social network based limitations on who can see it, they can apply regional limitations on who can see it, or they can delete/block the content altogether.
And it's Facebook's constitutional 1st amendment free speech right to do so, and control what messages they send, as this reflects on their company.
The lawsuit is a frivolous charge.
Doesn't matter if the suing party is a bona fide patent troll or a frivolous suit from a "legitimate" company.
Then why did you ask about defending themselves against patent trolls?
How likely is it that a legitimate company suing them is going to be in their same field and practicing their patents? It's extremely unlikely, that's for sure.
Acquiring a few BS patents is not a defense against patent trolls OR legitimate companies, instead you need MANY generic patents, like IBM or Microsoft has, if you expect to use patents as a defense, AND....
Khan Academy doesn't have that much money to defend itself against patent lawsuits, no matter who they come from.
Non-sequitur. The process of applying and going through the process and obtaining a full-blown patent is expensive, and you say they have little money for defense... that's just inconsistent with them getting a bunch of patents. This is a method of defense against would-be infringement lawsuits that is quite expensive, which could come from any source patent troll or legitimate company in ANY industry, not just your same industry.
Just having a patent provides no defense, if you cannot use it as a basis for suing your litigator.
If you want to make sure someone else doesn't patent your invention, then you just need to create a provisional patent or defensive publication, which doesn't involve many thousands of $$$ in application, research, and legal fees.
The only reason to obtain just a few patents concerning what you are doing is for generating revenue....
I don't know. But for sure, filing for your own patents does not protect against patent trolls.
It's not as if you can countersue a patent troll, as by definition: a troll is not an engineering business but a business centered around acquiring patents and generating revenue from them.
The only patent that would really defend against trolls would be a patent on patent trolling and methods thereof.
I thought KA benign, until they started getting patents.... it does not matter how benign they seem to be now, however, as the patents are not inherently tied to their current behavior which can change over time, And, moreover.... the possibility exists that the patents could change ownership in the future.
Khan Academy is a non-profit.
So what? You haven't contradicted any of my propositions.
There are many non-profit Educational organizations.
Just because they are non-profit does not mean that every activity they conduct or pursue is ultimately beneficial to the public.
The people who operate and govern a non-profit still get paid, And many non-profit educational organizations sell products or services; e.g. Just about every private and public college.
Non-profits also don't want competition, at least not direct competition within their specific niche. They still need revenue and recognition to fund their enterprise.
Also, schools do compete with one another for students and for donations.
At an organizational level; there are many schools whose administrations would favor kick out / make themselves the only university in a region, if they could get away with it / legally succeed at doing so.
I would encourage you to drop the "Non-Profit = Always good", "Profit = Evil" ideas.
It's most likely for a defensive purpose
In other words.... to help prevent competition / defend and prevent against someone else creating a competing service similar to Khan Academy that might take away some of Khan Academy's users, market share, or grant money and threaten KA staffs' ability to get paid.
Seeing as Tron: Legacy grossed $400 million and was considered a success, as 11th highest grossing film in 2010, then I would say more than "four people" watched Tron 2.
And as someone else mentioned, if nothing shows up quickly enough, another "false flag" operation.
It's not necessary, and I think 9/11 was a real incident, not a false-flag.
However, 9/11 could have prevented, and laziness/incompetence plus a poor job done by intelligence agency staff and neglect of their reports by those in charge contributed to the unmitigated success of the attack.
That's all that needs to happen after Pat. act expires. Laziness or incompetence by the intelligence agencies resulting in failure to prevent an event that could and should easily be prevented based on available intelligence.
If they want to politicize this.... as Obama's administration has been seen to do in the past on some other issues such as "government shutdowns", when the program expires, the agencies can just start pretending "their hands are tied" and stop providing some vital intelligence; even some intelligence they were able to gather and did gather before Pat. act.
An event can happen from negligence in the form of inaction / failure to gather intelligence they should have gathered, or failing to act on intelligence and prevent occurence.
Then when the event happens, they'll claim the loss of Pat. act privileges to spy on ordinary 'mericans made their jobs unduly harder, and they "need the Pat. act" and more to do effective work.
this was obviously on someone's wet dream wish list (it was not so much written as released from the vaults)
There's probably an even better successor version of the law waiting in the vaults for the next event of a similar magnitude.
The intelligence agencies can just lay low for a few months; there's bound to be an event justifying uber-surveillance powers and a never-expiring new and improved version of patriot act that gives even more powers for surveillance of americans and casting dragnets and datamining + data fishing expeditions.
I think you missed out on a few things and underestimated the complexity of the law and of accounting (beyond simple bookkeeping/process execution)... plastic pipes don't replace plumbers who are still needed to install them. You still need HVAC techs to do the install/replacement, and shipping 100 pounds of copper overseas, is insanely expensive.
I noticed you didn't put electricians in your list.
There's no plastic pipe solution you can buy to replace the need for a human to hook up your 120 / 240 volt circuits, troubleshoot wiring issues, and repair / install service panels.
If there are currently fewer than 3 options for services in any areas they are proposing to merge or if their merger would drop the competition
Cable companies do not share their infrastructure, and they usually have exclusive "franchise" agreements with municipalities. Are there actually any areas where buying service from your choice of Time Warner, or Charter was an option?
I believe this in the past has been the big cable co's argument that mergers between companies servicing different areas don't reduce competition.
They already have the monopoly..... the only way to switch is to move house. Would anyone actually move house to switch cable carriers?
Gasoline doesn't explode, it burns.
You're assuming there's gasoline in that primary or secondary gas tank, and it's not packed full of nitroglycerin, TNT, or high explosive charges instead.
An empty pressure cooker doesn't explode either.
This is called an "abundance of caution," and is perfectly understandable to anyone that hasn't been living under a rock for the last twenty years.
In 'abundance of caution' the police should tear open the trunk of any vehicle parked anywhere with a sealed trunk of any vehicle left unattended, since you can never be too sure there's not a pressure cooker in there, or god forbid.... some bags of fertilizer.
Were you paying attention to what two idiots did with pressure cookers in Boston a few years ago?
So if the idiots had put their stupid s*** in a laptop bag or suitcase, then you would say the cops should break into any car left unattended with a suitcase or laptop bag visible and detonate the bag?
Idiots do a lot of stupid things all the time with ordinary things.
That doesn't make mere ownership and display of one of the things some idiot or another has done some stupid thing with in the past a crime or probable cause for police invasion and excessive force in the unnecessary destruction of personal property.
There's not a current legitimate emergency situation that justifies the mass seizure or destruction of innocent people's pressure cookers.
Home come Google doesn't have a Facebook login, yet?
I feel they should index the page in search results and make the image available from the Cache.
Google fingered bad parenting for its lack of women techies.
More like: Google disagrees with their parenting.
Just because their values as parents didn't agree with your values today, Or your general desire to have more people in computer science, in order to reduce wages, Or your desire to have more diversity among computer scientists to help you comply with arbitrary government-imposed regulations on your employee population : does not make them bad parents.
He's not getting the book thrown at him in any of the media accounts I've read, he's getting the same treatment he would have received if he was pulled over for a routine traffic stop.
He wasn't driving at the time, and the miscarriage of justice is wanton and unnecessary destruction of valued personal property --- his vehicle, and his cookingware.
That doesn't mean cruising past the White House on this little road trip is a sensible decision, never mind parking nearby while I grab a bite to eat or take a few photos.
He didn't pack his car full of firearms and cruise past the Whitehouse.
It was a pressure cooker, and he left his car parked at the mall.
I don't know what shops are at the mall his car was found at, but I would imagine that they sell pressure cookers.
And these are ordinary cooking appliances, not weapons.... I would not be the least bit surprised for there to be many instances of people having left one in their car.
They are doing background checks likely, but not the store.... authorities are checking with retailers after purchase, by delivering orders to provide records of customers' purchases of certain items.