The "Google Opt Out Village" was disturbing enough.
This Google mafia stuff is really getting quite frightening.
Just because someone doesn't want the building on street view is no reason to shoot it.
What's next, hand grenades against people complaining about Google's privacy practices?
I suppose let the buyer beware... once you ask Google to remove your place from streetview, make sure to wear a bullet proof vest at all times.
The manually taken photos were of higher quality, and more detail than the Google streetview ones.
Then the request to remove from streetview........ could result in more detailed imagery of the area
being posted to a place where more people will notice it
(Since streetview is so large, and has so many images.... a picture of an obscure place would probably not be noticed by many people, let alone get any attention or concern)
The ISPs would have opportunities to charge more, and not have to buy as much capacity.
Think about it... if as an ISP, your users have to pay more for high utilization, but not more for large amounts of data transfer spread over time, then it actually discourages behaviors that could cause congestion on the network, and encourages behaviors that relieve congestion.
It gives customers a financial incentive to limit their transfer rates.
Which increases the amount of oversubscription you could achieve, without service being negatively effected.
It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself--anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face...; was itself a punishable offense. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime..."
- George Orwell, 1984, Book 1, Chapter 5
Phone and cable companies have already been required for MANY years to fix your phone line or cable connection
It may be that nothing is broken.
Your distance from the CO is simply so large that you intrinsically cannot achieve even half the advertised speed.
It would be in DSL providers' interests to make the "distant cutoff" shorter, to increase their average speeds closer to the max, if they had to be judged based on that.
A minority of subscribers are a long distance from the CO. Beyond a certain distance, the DSL provider won't even try.
If they have an incentive to make that cutoff shorter, they will.
Either you cannot read English to well, or you are just continuing to tell bigger lies... Let me see if I can find words your pea-sized brain can comprehend.
ALL exchange of goods, services, or cash between two different parties are commerce.
Many CHURCHES HAVE 501c TAX EXEMPT STATUS.
There is nothing wrong with TAX EXEMPT STATUS, but it has nothing to do with whether something they do is "commerce" or not
If a church sells something, that sale IS COMMERCE. Even if the Church pays no tax on the income from the sale, and is not required to remit sales tax.
It is commerce, so the government would have the right to charge a tax if they chose to.
TAX EXEMPT STATUS of a participant does not render a transaction non-commerce.
Congress has the right to regulate interstate commerce.
Congress' rights are limited (the federal government has no right to regulate commerce that stays in one state, the states have that right)
Congress has the right to regulate even commerce it does not tax.
Congress has the right to tax incomes, even incomes it chooses not to. By definition all incomes arise from commerce.
IF A CHURCH BUYS OR SELLS SOMETHING, IT IS COMMERCE. Even though this is not taxed.
NON-PROFITS are not exempt from laws related to commerce, other than laws that specifically exempt non-profits.
For example, non-profit organizations can commit anti-trust violations and be subject to the same penalties as a for-profit corporation would.
Commerce does not mean "taxed transaction"
Commerce does not mean "for profit".
Commerce does not mean "both participants have to pay taxes"
Non-profit does not mean "revenue is not income"
Non-taxable income is still income.
NON-PROFITS STILL HAVE TO REPORT ANY INCOME to the government.
What if it were reasonable for a person to assume that the webcams either could not or would not be activated remotely,
Obviously there are many ways for a webcam to be activated remotely, or by malware if the system is compromised. The student receives the laptop from the school in an unknown state of cleanliness. The assumption is not entirely reasonable.
and the school was aware that they could, and perhaps would be activated remotely, could it be said that they had a positive responsibility to disclose this relevant fact when giving out the laptops?
If the school was aware they would be activated remotely, perhaps.
But it seems like they weren't supposed to be activated remotely, and some people at the school unilaterally decided to activate and keep them active, for bogus (or non-existent reasons).
You are looking at this as something the school district did... I say nonsense, this is a misconduct conducted by employees of the school district, and they should be disciplined and personally charged accordingly.
Pay as you go data plans are unfair. The more data you transfer, the more you pay on average for the same network resources.
We should be asking for 95th-percentile network utilization-based billing
With price breaks for off-peak hours and a premium for prime time utilization.
The guy who downloads a few GB of Linux ISOs from 2am to 6am, or over several days at a trickle...
(i.e. rate-limited on their end)
Should not pay as much as the guy who maxes out his connection at prime time when the network is at peak utilization.
The ISP should also allow you to apply QoS markers to your packets and honor them to reduce priority of traffic, and low-priority packets should be less expensive,
since you were essentially marking your traffic as specifically drop-eligible in case of any congestion.
4)Insurance Coverage -- Up to $100,000 coverage in case of an accident, Variable-rate deductible as low as $1000.
3)Cell phone data -- Up to 2GB of data per month included (some months, you only get 100K and have to pay 0.1 cents per Kilobyte (= $0.10/Kilobyte ) for more
2)Gas Stations -- fuel additive concentrations -- Up to 90% unleaded fuel (some days, the gas will be 100% additives, but you'll never find out anyways)
1)State lottery jackpots -- "Jackpot: up to $1,000,000" -- (Some jackpot winners who got the numbers right may found they have only one $1.)
They would probably force customers who get low speed to cancel service, so they could have higher numbers.
By making their service break until they switched to a competitor or informed their line can't actually support the service, and they need to cancel.
Assuming there's some intrinsic reason certain customers got lower speeds, and it would be costly or impossible to address.
Reminiscent of the US tax system.... 10% of the people pay 90% of the taxes.
10% of broadband users get a transfer rate that is 90% (or more) of the rate advertised.
And ISPs like Verizon complain about 2% of the users transferring more than 2GB of data a month.
Now we know why
Only a small portion of the subscribers actually get the really high speeds that allow them to do everything they want transparently, which, of course uses more bandwidth,
due to the ISP's failure to deliver true quality high speed links.
98% of users are sick of fighting their slow internet connections
I believe they are looking at 'median' and 'mean' maximum speeds.
If the maximum speed your line achieve is less than the advertised speed, and they didn't inform you that the advertised speed was unavailable and inform you would get XXX instead, then the ISP lied to you.
The parents have no legal ability to do so.
Only attorneys of the state and federal government district attorneys offices have the ability to press criminal charges.
A private person cannot personally press criminal charges, nor can a private person hire an attorney to press criminal charges.
This is what allows the entire concept of a plea bargain to exist.
The federal or state prosecutor's office with jurisdiction has the sole authority to decide whether charges will be pressed or not.
If private people could press charges, there wouldn't be plea bargains, since "someone else" might decide to chime in and press the charges again.
Thus the "bargain" would not be a bargain at all.
Murderers or Bandits caught by police could pay people under the table to prosecute them and do a slipshod job...
since due to the constitution 5th amendment, noone can be twice put under jeapordy of life and limb.
There are other ways of obscuring a camera besides attaching tape or other materials to the casing, a piece of construction paper, folded longwise, to form an envelope, covering the top of the screen; cut to a width where view of the display is not obstructed.
And with any hole positions needed cut out so the laptop can still close.
Not recommended. Leaving a flaming bag of dog shit at a federal official's doorstep might be some sort of actionable offense.
Especially if the flames jump too high and set something on fire.
The prosecutor would probably get the police investigating that, so they could have one of their buddies prosecute very quickly, and get dog-shit-senders into federal pound-me-in-the-a$$-prison in short order
The bill of rights was always meant to limit the power of congress.
Technically it has nothing to do with protecting against the majority of the population.
The 'majority of the population' can always elect representatives to revise the bill of rights according to their wishes.
(Or more likely.... elect a president who will appoint judges that interpret the bill of rights in a way that appeases the population)
Slashdot Mirror
gsub(/commercial/,"",$0)
A school district tried this and barely avoided having officials brought before a grand jury and indicted.
Perhaps we will get to see Mr. Jobs wearing iStripes in the iPrison? Or iPrisonUniform in the iAlcatrez.
Script Kiddie: Dear diary: Jackpot.
The "Google Opt Out Village" was disturbing enough.
This Google mafia stuff is really getting quite frightening.
Just because someone doesn't want the building on street view is no reason to shoot it. What's next, hand grenades against people complaining about Google's privacy practices?
I suppose let the buyer beware... once you ask Google to remove your place from streetview, make sure to wear a bullet proof vest at all times.
The manually taken photos were of higher quality, and more detail than the Google streetview ones. Then the request to remove from streetview........ could result in more detailed imagery of the area being posted to a place where more people will notice it
(Since streetview is so large, and has so many images.... a picture of an obscure place would probably not be noticed by many people, let alone get any attention or concern)
You know... the $1000 MSRP Glorified Ethernet cable ?
It must improve sound quality, speed, performance, or something.
This disproving the suggestion of this post that a cable can't improve the quality of 1s and 0s...
I mean.... why else would people spend so much on a special link cable, if it were not better than your run of the mill Ethernet cable?
Surely such a reputable manufacturer would not consider trying to sell people a useless product. Right?
I mean... look at all the cabling/media choices we have even for just plain Ethernet cable Cat3, Cat5, Cat5e, Cat5e 24 AWG, Cat6, Cat6a, Cat7.....
We can also use the cheap connectors, or the gold plated ones.
There's gotta be some reason people are willing to spend the extra for gold plated Cat6a or 5e, for their home networks....
Inside the lab of one of the world's last bloggers
The ISPs would have opportunities to charge more, and not have to buy as much capacity.
Think about it... if as an ISP, your users have to pay more for high utilization, but not more for large amounts of data transfer spread over time, then it actually discourages behaviors that could cause congestion on the network, and encourages behaviors that relieve congestion.
It gives customers a financial incentive to limit their transfer rates.
Which increases the amount of oversubscription you could achieve, without service being negatively effected.
Phone and cable companies have already been required for MANY years to fix your phone line or cable connection
It may be that nothing is broken. Your distance from the CO is simply so large that you intrinsically cannot achieve even half the advertised speed.
It would be in DSL providers' interests to make the "distant cutoff" shorter, to increase their average speeds closer to the max, if they had to be judged based on that.
A minority of subscribers are a long distance from the CO. Beyond a certain distance, the DSL provider won't even try.
If they have an incentive to make that cutoff shorter, they will.
Either you cannot read English to well, or you are just continuing to tell bigger lies... Let me see if I can find words your pea-sized brain can comprehend.
ALL exchange of goods, services, or cash between two different parties are commerce.
Many CHURCHES HAVE 501c TAX EXEMPT STATUS.
There is nothing wrong with TAX EXEMPT STATUS, but it has nothing to do with whether something they do is "commerce" or not
If a church sells something, that sale IS COMMERCE. Even if the Church pays no tax on the income from the sale, and is not required to remit sales tax. It is commerce, so the government would have the right to charge a tax if they chose to.
TAX EXEMPT STATUS of a participant does not render a transaction non-commerce.
Congress has the right to regulate interstate commerce.
Congress' rights are limited (the federal government has no right to regulate commerce that stays in one state, the states have that right)
Congress has the right to regulate even commerce it does not tax.
Congress has the right to tax incomes, even incomes it chooses not to. By definition all incomes arise from commerce.
IF A CHURCH BUYS OR SELLS SOMETHING, IT IS COMMERCE. Even though this is not taxed.
NON-PROFITS are not exempt from laws related to commerce, other than laws that specifically exempt non-profits.
For example, non-profit organizations can commit anti-trust violations and be subject to the same penalties as a for-profit corporation would.
Commerce does not mean "taxed transaction"
Commerce does not mean "for profit".
Commerce does not mean "both participants have to pay taxes"
Non-profit does not mean "revenue is not income"
Non-taxable income is still income.
NON-PROFITS STILL HAVE TO REPORT ANY INCOME to the government.
What if it were reasonable for a person to assume that the webcams either could not or would not be activated remotely,
Obviously there are many ways for a webcam to be activated remotely, or by malware if the system is compromised. The student receives the laptop from the school in an unknown state of cleanliness. The assumption is not entirely reasonable.
and the school was aware that they could, and perhaps would be activated remotely, could it be said that they had a positive responsibility to disclose this relevant fact when giving out the laptops?
If the school was aware they would be activated remotely, perhaps.
But it seems like they weren't supposed to be activated remotely, and some people at the school unilaterally decided to activate and keep them active, for bogus (or non-existent reasons).
You are looking at this as something the school district did... I say nonsense, this is a misconduct conducted by employees of the school district, and they should be disciplined and personally charged accordingly.
when they get a 20 year term reduced to 10. How many people *wouldn't* lie in that situation.
Almost nobody.
Stop lying. The US government still calls it commerce, even when it's not taxed.
Pay as you go data plans are unfair. The more data you transfer, the more you pay on average for the same network resources.
We should be asking for 95th-percentile network utilization-based billing
With price breaks for off-peak hours and a premium for prime time utilization.
The guy who downloads a few GB of Linux ISOs from 2am to 6am, or over several days at a trickle... (i.e. rate-limited on their end)
Should not pay as much as the guy who maxes out his connection at prime time when the network is at peak utilization.
The ISP should also allow you to apply QoS markers to your packets and honor them to reduce priority of traffic, and low-priority packets should be less expensive, since you were essentially marking your traffic as specifically drop-eligible in case of any congestion.
Yeah
5)Interest rates -- Up to 90 days, same as cash (use your imagination)
4)Insurance Coverage -- Up to $100,000 coverage in case of an accident, Variable-rate deductible as low as $1000.
3)Cell phone data -- Up to 2GB of data per month included (some months, you only get 100K and have to pay 0.1 cents per Kilobyte (= $0.10/Kilobyte ) for more
2)Gas Stations -- fuel additive concentrations -- Up to 90% unleaded fuel (some days, the gas will be 100% additives, but you'll never find out anyways)
1)State lottery jackpots -- "Jackpot: up to $1,000,000" -- (Some jackpot winners who got the numbers right may found they have only one $1.)
No.... they are in this business to make money.
They would probably force customers who get low speed to cancel service, so they could have higher numbers. By making their service break until they switched to a competitor or informed their line can't actually support the service, and they need to cancel.
Assuming there's some intrinsic reason certain customers got lower speeds, and it would be costly or impossible to address.
Reminiscent of the US tax system.... 10% of the people pay 90% of the taxes.
10% of broadband users get a transfer rate that is 90% (or more) of the rate advertised.
And ISPs like Verizon complain about 2% of the users transferring more than 2GB of data a month.
Now we know why
Only a small portion of the subscribers actually get the really high speeds that allow them to do everything they want transparently, which, of course uses more bandwidth, due to the ISP's failure to deliver true quality high speed links.
98% of users are sick of fighting their slow internet connections
Are you sure it's not bear wears hat, pope shits in wood?
That would be more interesting....
New toilet paper brand: up to 1000 sheets (actually contains 500 sheets)
New printer ink cartridge brand: up to 10000 pages (actually only enough ink for 10 pages)
New type of fast food hamburger.... up to 3 beef patties (actually doesn't contain any meat)
I believe they are looking at 'median' and 'mean' maximum speeds.
If the maximum speed your line achieve is less than the advertised speed, and they didn't inform you that the advertised speed was unavailable and inform you would get XXX instead, then the ISP lied to you.
The parents have no legal ability to do so. Only attorneys of the state and federal government district attorneys offices have the ability to press criminal charges.
A private person cannot personally press criminal charges, nor can a private person hire an attorney to press criminal charges.
This is what allows the entire concept of a plea bargain to exist.
The federal or state prosecutor's office with jurisdiction has the sole authority to decide whether charges will be pressed or not.
If private people could press charges, there wouldn't be plea bargains, since "someone else" might decide to chime in and press the charges again. Thus the "bargain" would not be a bargain at all.
Murderers or Bandits caught by police could pay people under the table to prosecute them and do a slipshod job... since due to the constitution 5th amendment, noone can be twice put under jeapordy of life and limb.
There are other ways of obscuring a camera besides attaching tape or other materials to the casing, a piece of construction paper, folded longwise, to form an envelope, covering the top of the screen; cut to a width where view of the display is not obstructed.
And with any hole positions needed cut out so the laptop can still close.
Not recommended. Leaving a flaming bag of dog shit at a federal official's doorstep might be some sort of actionable offense. Especially if the flames jump too high and set something on fire.
The prosecutor would probably get the police investigating that, so they could have one of their buddies prosecute very quickly, and get dog-shit-senders into federal pound-me-in-the-a$$-prison in short order
It is if you consent to it.
No... it is if the propery owner consents to it
A minor child is not capable of providing legal consent to their school to install/use a camera in the parent's house.
The bill of rights was always meant to limit the power of congress.
Technically it has nothing to do with protecting against the majority of the population. The 'majority of the population' can always elect representatives to revise the bill of rights according to their wishes.
(Or more likely.... elect a president who will appoint judges that interpret the bill of rights in a way that appeases the population)