That's why he's in trouble. High strength magnets are not a toy.
They certainly are a toy. By the way, there are other adult toys kids should not have access to --- such as hunting rifles used in hunting sports.
Firecrackers, BDSM gear, high powered laser pointers,
racing cars, four wheelers/ATVs, diving boards, dirt bikes, soldering irons, CNC tools, wood carving and arc welding tools, and the list of adult toys/hobbyist products goes on and on; of adult toys that nobody should allow their kids (or kids) unfettered access to, aside from exceptional situations --- very responsible kids who first understand the dangers and are supervised, and known to be very careful and responsible.
Shhhh! Don't tell these guys [apple.com] because they don't know that-- they went ahead and wrote a BASIC interpreter for iPad in 2010 and it's now up to version 3.5.
I won't... but Apple might... just like the banned the Commodore 64 emulation app, because it made a BASIC interpreter available.
Short of a change in Apple's policies to allow interpreters and apps using unofficial frameworks -- I would be very very scared to rely on an app like that
If there's anything I feel is worse than not having programmability --- it's having unofficial programmability through an app not adhering to application guidelines, that Apple might ban and delete from owners' devices at their will.
It would be better to have a device where you can assure that in the long term, the capability will be there.
This is completely wrong, the App store has scripting interpreter's available.
OK; great, so if the kid has a credit card to sign up for an iTunes account, and the school them will allow them to install apps on their device, then they can add an interpreter to it of some sort.
How long will the interpreter be available though? I distinctly remember a Commodore64 emulator getting banned from the app store, because it provided access to a BASIC interpreter; which was not allowed by Apple.
How are the other interpreters different; why haven't they been found and deleted by Apple yet?
You can't make a BASIC interpreter App and get it listed on the Apple store, for folks to download.
Any app that provides programmability is not allowed....
therefore; the TI-series calculators or Android devices will Always provide a better experience for tinkerers,
and be the way to go if you want to learn about technology ---- until (or unless) Apple changes their ways,
the iOS platform they have provided is essentially a black box: you are not meant to understand it,
not meant to program it -- just to consume content on it.
It's not really a learning tool; although there is educational and informational content that can be consumed on the device
to learn things.
Of course... Android is a better learning tool, and an iOS device such as a iPhone or iPad should not be the first one you get or your first choice: if you might be an engineering type and want to learn about, tinker with the technology, or see how it works.
States simply can't prohibit either entry or exit of other otherwise legal citizens of other states and it can be assumed that includes travel internal to that state too.
They can't prohibit it; but they can make it difficult. For example, by not providing any maintained accessible roads to drive a car on, and at the same time: prohibiting any private entities from creating or maintaining a road across state lines.
There is no constitutional requirement that states facilitate entry or exit, by enabling, or allowing certain kinds of contraptions.
States don't have to allow people to launch or land airplanes; and if they do, they may require qualifications or the meeting of regulations, before one is allowed to board or pilot one, and about what is allowed to be on a plane when it is launched or landed.
The argument that the Constitution doesn't specifically mention the right to travel is bullshit
Liberty and freedom to travel IS a natural right that the people have.
However.... access to air travel as a mode of transportation is not a natural right.
Air travel exists only with the government's help in the form of regulation.
In just the same way as you have no right to drive, and no right of access to government maintained roads; it is a privilege,
made possible only by government expense and regulation.
Or how about.... how can you drive back home from Hawaii; if something political you posted causes you to get No-Fly listed while you happen to have stopped there on vacation or en route to your destination?
At the very least, someone on the No-Fly list should be allowed to fly if they pay for a second seat and an armed government agent to sit behind them the whole flight.
They could get past this whole sticky situation, by replacing the No-Fly list with a Can-Fly list; and set a default of nobody is allowed to fly. Whitelists work better than blacklists anyways.
If they are suspicious of you, your Can-Fly list entry should contain a trigger rule that causes the relevant authorities to be notified whenever you step on a plane.
You get on the Can-Fly list for specified date ranges, and you cannot be deleted, unless a warrant is issued for your arrest.
If they'd asked for a receipt that said "donation" instead of "services rendered: support", the chances are better the offer wouldn't have been viewed as a scam. As it was, it was a scam -- scamming the company auditors into thinking an expense was a valid expense and not a voluntary handout.
Ah, but if they received a benefit from the developer's work -- it's not fraudulent to label their voluntary payment for support as "support".
There is a bit of a problem though, that there might be a risk to the developers: what if someone else from the company comes back later, and claims they aren't getting the support that they paid for?
self-employment schedule C (IIRC) that I'd rather not have to deal with, all because some money I make comes in as royalties instead of in my normal paycheck. It makes my taxes much more complicated than I'd like them to be. Especially if you're talking about a group of developers and expecting one of them to accept the money (and tax liability) for money that they'll all benefit from.
If the money is not for their benefit, then they are a nominee/middleman, and there is a procedure for that.
The nature of what they are required to do is not any more complicated than what what they are required to do if they receive a bunch of smaller donations.
And obviously; the receiver of the payments should not incur a financial loss to do so, if they want to make it easier on the other developers by absorbing the tax liability for them and gifting money to other developers as required ---- then the receiver should be certain to retain at least the amount of dollars required to cover the liability and their receiving expenses.
Many open source projects are sustained by non-profits or commercial enterprises; perhaps those are the best ones to "donate" to by purchasing support.
This works really well with Redhat: they are happy to take a few thousand per server as a "subscription"
Mod this up to 6! With a dozen scams appearing in people's inboxes every day, all with some sort of odd story about why things must be done in something other than the most natural way, this story about short deadlines (a classic element of a scam to keep the mark from thinking on it too long) and some bogus invoice for something (anything at all, really! Trust us it's fine!) sounds a lot like a scam.
Obviously the request for an invoice is so the donation can be characterized as an expense.
A donation to something that's not a qualified non-profit is not tax-deductible, but an expense for support is deductible.
With a slight modification:
Shock people every time they try to type up a spam (or marketing) e-mail message
and Shock people every time they are about to forward a chain letter or post something stupid on a mailing list or online forum
Just because you CAN take over the vehicle doesn't mean you will. The law should be reserved for those that actually have taken control of the vehicle.
It gets worse, maybe than you even think..... If you are sleeping in the driver's seat in the parking lot of a store visible from the public street; or on the side of the highway, with your car shut off, and keys in your pocket: people have been convicted of DUI under those circumstances --- because possessing the keys and being in the driver's seat meant they were in control of the vehicle.
Or if you were drunk, parked somewhere on the shoulder of the interstate to rest.
That is: there are cases where choosing not to drive can increase the probability that you get arrested for DUI or impaired driving.
There are also cases, where people on horseback or 4 wheelers were charged with DUI, even though the driver's didn't possess a license.
There was a case where a guy with a private fence-enclosed road was charged with DUI for driving his unregistered farm truck in his own backyard, by an officer who breached his fence on foot, after observing him driving.
Perhaps so... another explanation is that the removal was generating bad PR.
If there hadn't been Slashdot coverage of the loss of the capability, they might have
continued with some plan of removing the capability
I suppose we will never know.
If they truly want to be non-evil; they'll provide a documented stable API to expose the hardware's
functionality -- instead of just undocumented API they keep randomly changing in minor updates.
This kind of thing does happen, so it is important to be transparent so that the issue can be easily appealed and the loan reviewed.
Well; the problem with that is anyone can disavow the legitimacy of their own FB account.
Furthermore; they can't possibly meet the FCRA requirements of disclosing all the pertinent information --- they have to disclose it, BUT if they tell you that Person X your "friend on Facebook" is a deadbeat, then the CRA has just broken the law by providing you private data about someone else's finances.
Currently all of science and medicine consider OOB and religious experiences to be hallucinations and that all perception and thought exist in the brain exclusively. If repeatable experiments prove this false, it would open the floodgates.
Just because the person perceive's an OOB experience; doesn't mean their thought ever really left their body.
There may be multiple kinds of OOB experiences, not all the same in nature.
I wouldn't get my hopes up about remote viewing or speaking to the presence or absence of objects that the eyes of the person's body could not physically see.
What happens when someone else uses your real name maliciously to intentionally associate with other accounts under names of people known to be criminals or bad credit risks, OR when your real name is very common, so there are are 50 facebook accounts with your same name?
Not always. Sometimes they provide *unavailability* zones.
That's just a play on words: they are availability zones.
Just because you don't like how frequently they have a zone-wide outage doesn't change the name.
Another word for their availability zones is fault domain or failure domain.
If you don't want two things to fail together, you run them in a different region, using only resources in separate availability zones in separate regions.
But that's the problem. *THEY* (i.e., AWS or whoever) are supposed to take care of all that stuff. They're supposed to worry about "uptime" and fixing things when they break and having redundant systems that kick in when something breaks so that there's no loss of service. That's the whole point of putting stuff in the "cloud".
Boy have you been fed a line.
Read the SLA. If it's not in there; then you don't get it.
If you think the cloud provider is clustering your instance and giving you HA; then AWS is not for you.
Amazon provides availability zones you can provision separate instances storage and networks in.
If your application cannot survive the failure of an instance and the failure of an entire availability zone,
then you don't have HA, and Amazon won't give it to you -- your app may be inappropriate for AWS, if HA is required.
When you want multiple locations("regions" in aws) you need to pay for resources in each additional region, then pay another cost to provide that failover.
Or you can have storage in those regions prepped to failover, with no other resources provisioned. When failure needs to occur, you start spinning up the instances in the other region.
It does require planning; you can reroute But you don't get that automatically; it requires work and preparation.
the guy was in a separate company, the company delivered a product and wasn't paid for it.
In other words, the IP belongs to the separate company, he was hired to do work for; Not Lockheed, and Not the guy.
Failing to have a contract requiring he destroy the data doesn't give him a right to copy and distribute it though.
So in theory there is the potential for serious consequences against both buyer and seller of the eBay auction;
assuming that eBay doesn't pull the auction, and the DoD doesn't interrupt the sale, by freezing assets as soon as money changes hands.
More importantly, server backups from the gentleman's time at Lockheed are included, being the real valuable in this auction
I have a hard time imagining, that Lockheed has consented to release of server backups
containing intellectual property they made or have an interest in.
Slashdot Mirror
That's why he's in trouble. High strength magnets are not a toy.
They certainly are a toy. By the way, there are other adult toys kids should not have access to --- such as hunting rifles used in hunting sports.
Firecrackers, BDSM gear, high powered laser pointers, racing cars, four wheelers/ATVs, diving boards, dirt bikes, soldering irons, CNC tools, wood carving and arc welding tools, and the list of adult toys/hobbyist products goes on and on; of adult toys that nobody should allow their kids (or kids) unfettered access to, aside from exceptional situations --- very responsible kids who first understand the dangers and are supervised, and known to be very careful and responsible.
You have to eat more than one to have the problem. A single one passes through without attracting itself to anything else.
As long as you stay away from anything and everything metallic or magnetic....
Shhhh! Don't tell these guys [apple.com] because they don't know that-- they went ahead and wrote a BASIC interpreter for iPad in 2010 and it's now up to version 3.5.
I won't... but Apple might... just like the banned the Commodore 64 emulation app, because it made a BASIC interpreter available. Short of a change in Apple's policies to allow interpreters and apps using unofficial frameworks -- I would be very very scared to rely on an app like that
If there's anything I feel is worse than not having programmability --- it's having unofficial programmability through an app not adhering to application guidelines, that Apple might ban and delete from owners' devices at their will.
It would be better to have a device where you can assure that in the long term, the capability will be there.
This is completely wrong, the App store has scripting interpreter's available.
OK; great, so if the kid has a credit card to sign up for an iTunes account, and the school them will allow them to install apps on their device, then they can add an interpreter to it of some sort.
How long will the interpreter be available though? I distinctly remember a Commodore64 emulator getting banned from the app store, because it provided access to a BASIC interpreter; which was not allowed by Apple.
How are the other interpreters different; why haven't they been found and deleted by Apple yet?
Are you suggesting that a HP calculator app provides you tools that can be used to develop software on the iPhone platform?
You can't make a BASIC interpreter App and get it listed on the Apple store, for folks to download.
Any app that provides programmability is not allowed.... therefore; the TI-series calculators or Android devices will Always provide a better experience for tinkerers, and be the way to go if you want to learn about technology ---- until (or unless) Apple changes their ways, the iOS platform they have provided is essentially a black box: you are not meant to understand it, not meant to program it -- just to consume content on it.
It's not really a learning tool; although there is educational and informational content that can be consumed on the device to learn things.
Of course... Android is a better learning tool, and an iOS device such as a iPhone or iPad should not be the first one you get or your first choice: if you might be an engineering type and want to learn about, tinker with the technology, or see how it works.
States simply can't prohibit either entry or exit of other otherwise legal citizens of other states and it can be assumed that includes travel internal to that state too.
They can't prohibit it; but they can make it difficult. For example, by not providing any maintained accessible roads to drive a car on, and at the same time: prohibiting any private entities from creating or maintaining a road across state lines.
There is no constitutional requirement that states facilitate entry or exit, by enabling, or allowing certain kinds of contraptions.
States don't have to allow people to launch or land airplanes; and if they do, they may require qualifications or the meeting of regulations, before one is allowed to board or pilot one, and about what is allowed to be on a plane when it is launched or landed.
The argument that the Constitution doesn't specifically mention the right to travel is bullshit
Liberty and freedom to travel IS a natural right that the people have.
However.... access to air travel as a mode of transportation is not a natural right. Air travel exists only with the government's help in the form of regulation.
In just the same way as you have no right to drive, and no right of access to government maintained roads; it is a privilege, made possible only by government expense and regulation.
Or how about.... how can you drive back home from Hawaii; if something political you posted causes you to get No-Fly listed while you happen to have stopped there on vacation or en route to your destination?
At the very least, someone on the No-Fly list should be allowed to fly if they pay for a second seat and an armed government agent to sit behind them the whole flight.
They could get past this whole sticky situation, by replacing the No-Fly list with a Can-Fly list; and set a default of nobody is allowed to fly. Whitelists work better than blacklists anyways. If they are suspicious of you, your Can-Fly list entry should contain a trigger rule that causes the relevant authorities to be notified whenever you step on a plane.
You get on the Can-Fly list for specified date ranges, and you cannot be deleted, unless a warrant is issued for your arrest.
If they'd asked for a receipt that said "donation" instead of "services rendered: support", the chances are better the offer wouldn't have been viewed as a scam. As it was, it was a scam -- scamming the company auditors into thinking an expense was a valid expense and not a voluntary handout.
Ah, but if they received a benefit from the developer's work -- it's not fraudulent to label their voluntary payment for support as "support".
There is a bit of a problem though, that there might be a risk to the developers: what if someone else from the company comes back later, and claims they aren't getting the support that they paid for?
self-employment schedule C (IIRC) that I'd rather not have to deal with, all because some money I make comes in as royalties instead of in my normal paycheck. It makes my taxes much more complicated than I'd like them to be. Especially if you're talking about a group of developers and expecting one of them to accept the money (and tax liability) for money that they'll all benefit from.
If the money is not for their benefit, then they are a nominee/middleman, and there is a procedure for that. The nature of what they are required to do is not any more complicated than what what they are required to do if they receive a bunch of smaller donations.
And obviously; the receiver of the payments should not incur a financial loss to do so, if they want to make it easier on the other developers by absorbing the tax liability for them and gifting money to other developers as required ---- then the receiver should be certain to retain at least the amount of dollars required to cover the liability and their receiving expenses.
Many open source projects are sustained by non-profits or commercial enterprises; perhaps those are the best ones to "donate" to by purchasing support. This works really well with Redhat: they are happy to take a few thousand per server as a "subscription"
Mod this up to 6! With a dozen scams appearing in people's inboxes every day, all with some sort of odd story about why things must be done in something other than the most natural way, this story about short deadlines (a classic element of a scam to keep the mark from thinking on it too long) and some bogus invoice for something (anything at all, really! Trust us it's fine!) sounds a lot like a scam.
Obviously the request for an invoice is so the donation can be characterized as an expense. A donation to something that's not a qualified non-profit is not tax-deductible, but an expense for support is deductible.
Should come standard with every computer.
With a slight modification: Shock people every time they try to type up a spam (or marketing) e-mail message
and
Shock people every time they are about to forward a chain letter or post something stupid on a mailing list or online forum
Just because you CAN take over the vehicle doesn't mean you will. The law should be reserved for those that actually have taken control of the vehicle.
It gets worse, maybe than you even think..... If you are sleeping in the driver's seat in the parking lot of a store visible from the public street; or on the side of the highway, with your car shut off, and keys in your pocket: people have been convicted of DUI under those circumstances --- because possessing the keys and being in the driver's seat meant they were in control of the vehicle.
Or if you were drunk, parked somewhere on the shoulder of the interstate to rest.
That is: there are cases where choosing not to drive can increase the probability that you get arrested for DUI or impaired driving.
There are also cases, where people on horseback or 4 wheelers were charged with DUI, even though the driver's didn't possess a license.
There was a case where a guy with a private fence-enclosed road was charged with DUI for driving his unregistered farm truck in his own backyard, by an officer who breached his fence on foot, after observing him driving.
Totally ridiculous crap.
Perhaps so... another explanation is that the removal was generating bad PR. If there hadn't been Slashdot coverage of the loss of the capability, they might have continued with some plan of removing the capability I suppose we will never know.
If they truly want to be non-evil; they'll provide a documented stable API to expose the hardware's functionality -- instead of just undocumented API they keep randomly changing in minor updates.
This kind of thing does happen, so it is important to be transparent so that the issue can be easily appealed and the loan reviewed.
Well; the problem with that is anyone can disavow the legitimacy of their own FB account. Furthermore; they can't possibly meet the FCRA requirements of disclosing all the pertinent information --- they have to disclose it, BUT if they tell you that Person X your "friend on Facebook" is a deadbeat, then the CRA has just broken the law by providing you private data about someone else's finances.
Really. For $350 I expected more. Oops. I mean $35. Oh nevermind...
Roku has a competing offering for less than $50 that can handle local video.
Google's hardware was known to be capable of handling this. For them to introduce artificial barriers to prevent it is criminal.
Currently all of science and medicine consider OOB and religious experiences to be hallucinations and that all perception and thought exist in the brain exclusively. If repeatable experiments prove this false, it would open the floodgates.
Just because the person perceive's an OOB experience; doesn't mean their thought ever really left their body.
There may be multiple kinds of OOB experiences, not all the same in nature.
I wouldn't get my hopes up about remote viewing or speaking to the presence or absence of objects that the eyes of the person's body could not physically see.
What happens when someone else uses your real name maliciously to intentionally associate with other accounts under names of people known to be criminals or bad credit risks, OR when your real name is very common, so there are are 50 facebook accounts with your same name?
Not always. Sometimes they provide *unavailability* zones.
That's just a play on words: they are availability zones. Just because you don't like how frequently they have a zone-wide outage doesn't change the name.
Another word for their availability zones is fault domain or failure domain.
If you don't want two things to fail together, you run them in a different region, using only resources in separate availability zones in separate regions.
But that's the problem. *THEY* (i.e., AWS or whoever) are supposed to take care of all that stuff. They're supposed to worry about "uptime" and fixing things when they break and having redundant systems that kick in when something breaks so that there's no loss of service. That's the whole point of putting stuff in the "cloud".
Boy have you been fed a line. Read the SLA. If it's not in there; then you don't get it.
If you think the cloud provider is clustering your instance and giving you HA; then AWS is not for you.
Amazon provides availability zones you can provision separate instances storage and networks in. If your application cannot survive the failure of an instance and the failure of an entire availability zone, then you don't have HA, and Amazon won't give it to you -- your app may be inappropriate for AWS, if HA is required.
When you want multiple locations("regions" in aws) you need to pay for resources in each additional region, then pay another cost to provide that failover.
Or you can have storage in those regions prepped to failover, with no other resources provisioned. When failure needs to occur, you start spinning up the instances in the other region.
It does require planning; you can reroute But you don't get that automatically; it requires work and preparation.
the guy was in a separate company, the company delivered a product and wasn't paid for it.
In other words, the IP belongs to the separate company, he was hired to do work for; Not Lockheed, and Not the guy.
Failing to have a contract requiring he destroy the data doesn't give him a right to copy and distribute it though.
So in theory there is the potential for serious consequences against both buyer and seller of the eBay auction; assuming that eBay doesn't pull the auction, and the DoD doesn't interrupt the sale, by freezing assets as soon as money changes hands.
How wretched and nasty of Google to so suddenly turn to the dark side, and render the hardware useless.
More importantly, server backups from the gentleman's time at Lockheed are included, being the real valuable in this auction
I have a hard time imagining, that Lockheed has consented to release of server backups containing intellectual property they made or have an interest in.