It's not like they would be the first government facilities that block cell signals.
Building structures or installing materials to block cell signals is FINE.
What is not fine is what some prisons would want to do, which is: set up RF transmitters and emit jamming signals to disrupt communications.
The RF at sufficient power level to prevent cell phone communications would definitely have a very high risk of affecting other Cellular and Radio communications not by prisoners both On and Off prison grounds, Because wireless RF energy travels.... under certain weather conditions, the signal that normally travels 1 Mile to cover the prison could affect a location 1000 Miles away.
They're not monopolies? What are viable alternatives to search? What are viable social networking alternatives?
There are PLENTY. Monopoly is NOT a synonym for market penetration, Or the vast majority of the population going with product X: if some product Y exists and would solve the same basic problem as product X, then it is a competing option, and if a competing option exists, then X is not a monopoly. Google might have 95% people using it, and the alternatives not as popular as Google, and the quality of alternatives might be lower, but that doesn't make Google a monopoly. It just so happens Google is not close to being a monopoly.
Search: Yandex, Bing, Yahoo, Baidu.
And Facebook is nowhere close to having a monopoly on Social Networking websites.
Social Networking: LinkedIn, LiveJournal, Google Plus, Blogger, Reddit, Instagram, WhatsApp, MySpace, Twitter, Jaiku, Itsmy,
Because jamming creates a safety hazard for innocent people.
We should probably start by making assisting/aiding an incarcerated person's escape attempt, or facilitating a person in eluding authorities crimes punishable with much greater severity, instead of the current minor penalties. They should also depend on what crimes the escaped people committed.... springing an offender with a life sentence out of jail should land a minimum of 30 years on the violator.
Make it a misdemeanor just to fly a non-commercial aircraft within 500ft horizontal distance of a prison facility at a height of less than 1000ft.
Finally, they should employ means of detecting drones: monitor them closely, train their employees accordingly, and identify/pick up any dropped items --- basically, more vigilant guarding.
Or, do people just not care (or even know about) sound fidelity anymore...?
People care a bit about sound fidelity, But they don't care enough to spend an extra $1 per song. Let them get their high-fidelity audio files for $0.05 per 3 minute song or 20 songs per $1, and people will buy it.
I often get pulled in on meetings where the software and hardware sales guys are courting the CIOs and other executives
Frankly: This is the opposite of how it should work.... The CIOs ought to be asking the Engineers what products to buy. Let the software/hardware sales guys court the Engineers, Design, and Security teams, but at the end of the day, the products be chosen based on technical merit, quality, lack of undesirable characteristics, and their ability to actually efficiently the meet business requirements.
What happens when the sex robot breaks or the pedo gets bored of their robot and can't afford a new one? I would say some form of studies by scientists through formal (ethical) research is in order.
psychologists there believe that they help pedos to avoid interactions with real children.
This would mean less pedos in prison, which in the US, could mean a loss of revenue for private prisons due to lower inmate populations and loss of budget for various governmental entities who need number of convicted as a metric to justify budgets. Better ban the robots ahead of time to avoid the potential loss of $$$$. Also, by banning, a whole new crime will be created, thus allowing more sources of $$$$ for the powers that be, in the form of government dollars that will go towards enforcing these additional laws and contracted firms trying, convicting, sentencing, and carrying out those sentences.... jackpot
I suppose 20 years ago "noreply@" wasn't really standardized as an email bit bucket for domains
It's Not standardized. The Reply Address field is required by the RFC for a reason. "Noreply@" is a convention adopted by some marketers trying to skirt the internet standards which require that all E-mail have a return path to communicate responses, error messages, and other technical issues: back to the person responsible for having sent the original e-mail. Providing this responsible sender information and the responsible party handling Notifications about technical issues with your e-mail delivery or Warnings/Abuse reports/complaints back to you is not optional.
Demanding that someone subsidize or provide you pen and paper is not.
I just demand fair, reasonable, non-discriminatory, and equitable access to purchase pen and paper (Or Internet access) without being requested or required to sign over or waive any basic rights in the process, including the right to have disputes between me and a vendor mediated by the courts, and to pursue class action if damage or deception is committed against a large number of customers .
A Swedish study showed that battery production emits between 150 kg and 200 kg of CO2 for each KW of capacity.
Production of ANY car yields CO2 because of electricity usage. If you already have a car, the best thing you can do will be to not buy a new one until it will be no longer economical to continue to service.
Perhaps, by then, there will be Nuclear or Solar energy powering all the production of electric cars, then the CO2 tonnage will be low.
will just mod their drone so it doesn't squawk anything.
Which makes them easily detectable. "Drones that fail to identify flying more than 100ft high up or within 1000ft of any property other than the drone owner's private land can be shot down on sight"
Check [3] Case 1 Emissions. And: "The high fraction of direct Pb emission from material processing is related to solar glass manufacturing, which accounts for about 80% of such Pb emission."
However, lead and other toxic heavy metals may be necessary to be released during the overall production processes used to create the solar panels, so the production process can be said to include or contain these waste materials.
When I sell through eBay, I describe the item and set the price
You describe the item, But eBay sets requirements regarding what you can and cannot sell and restrictions on how you can settle the transaction -- for example eBay forces you to adhere to their processes and you are contractually prohibited against using eBay to find a buyer and then sell outside eBay, they also charge eBay fees based on the price and provide terms restricting what you can charge for additional services such as shipping. eBay sets requirements regarding payment method, and you're required to accept PayPal which is owned by the same company as eBay. If a buyer claims they didn't get what they thought they'd get, then eBay or PayPal will decide what happens to the money.
Same boss gave me a lecture on how security has no ROI.
Yes it does; its impact is just measured differently. The payoff is mitigating risks of damages to the company that will be caused by various events, some of them infrequent, some of them frequent, some of them large, some of them small. For each risk:
SLE (Single Loss event Cost) x annualized rate of occurrence (ARO) = ALE (Annualized Loss Expectancy)
Security measures help mitigate by reducing the expected SLE or decreasing the ARO.
that still do not meet the requirements of the 30 year old legislation.,
And then we have new establishments like Slashdot.org which requires answering a "CAPTCHA" which is deliberately obfuscated text inaccessible to people who are blind and deaf... It is almost as if they are TRYING to keep disabled people out of the community, so that they cannot comment on articles like this one.
If they're so essential, and Uber is a threat, then create a tax on ridesharing services and use the proceeds to subsidize accessible transportation (Including accessible transportation via ridesharing).
Let's put aside whether or not it is "fair" for Uber to have to provide (more) accessible services. Do other similar businesses have to conform to those standards?
The "most similar" businesses as transport companies are not really comparable to Uber, because those businesses own the vehicles, Or if they use 3rd party contractors, then they contract an entire fleet, And yes, Title III Americans with Disabilities act requires transportation companies to have "Accessible vehicles" available under some circumstances. And while there is no requirement that transportation companies have to provide the same wait time for the arrival of an accessible vehicle --- they are not allowed to require an extra fee from the user for the cost of removing barriers.
Uber is a bit different, because they are essentially acting as a middleman ---- Uber does not own any cars or employ the drivers. The individual drivers are businesses, but the individual drivers are also likely so small a business that they are exempt from the ADA ---- an individual Uber driver could legitimately make the argument that it would be fiscally irresponsible for them to spend $50,000 to outfit their car for wheelchair access. To be honest.... the only way it will be possible is if Uber provides them financial benefits to more than compensate for the added capital outlay and expensive frequent maintenance required.
Because the law says Uber cannot charge extra fees to the disabled user for barrier removal, then that means they must charge EVERY user of Uber extra fees to compensate.
"If you're a low-skilled worker with one of those jobs, $125 a month is a sizable amount of money,"
OK, we done screwed up with the minimum wage increase to $15... let's fix this. Let's create a Minimum hours offering requirement - Minimum wage shall be $30 instead for an employee's first week of work with a new employer --- employers must allow employees to work at least 32 hours a week and may not interfere with or penalize an employee for working all 32 hours.
The minimum wage for an employee will increase from $15 to $20 per hour if during any given month, their average hours per week is less than 32, and if an employee works less than 32 hours per week average during a given calendar month, that employee's minimum wage will be increased by $1 times the difference between 32 and the average hours each employee worked for that entire month, and the employee must be paid that increased minimum for every hour worked during that month;
if the employee works less than 25 hours/week average, then an additional $1 is added to the minimum wage for the entire month for every hour they worked less than 25; if the employee works less than 20 hours, add another $1, etc....
Allow 50% of the hour-based increase to min. wage to be waived for work-at-home and autonomous/unsupervised jobs only, Or when the employer contributes for employee health insurance, disability insurance, life insurance, and pension accounts (Defined benefit plan) meeting requirements.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not like they would be the first government facilities that block cell signals.
Building structures or installing materials to block cell signals is FINE.
What is not fine is what some prisons would want to do, which is: set up RF transmitters and emit jamming signals to disrupt communications.
The RF at sufficient power level to prevent cell phone communications would definitely have a very high risk of affecting other Cellular and Radio communications not by prisoners both On and Off prison grounds, Because wireless RF energy travels.... under certain weather conditions, the signal that normally travels 1 Mile to cover the prison could affect a location 1000 Miles away.
They're not monopolies? What are viable alternatives to search? What are viable social networking alternatives?
There are PLENTY. Monopoly is NOT a synonym for market penetration, Or the vast majority of the population going with product X: if some product Y exists and would solve the same basic problem as product X, then it is a competing option, and if a competing option exists, then X is not a monopoly. Google might have 95% people using it, and the alternatives not as popular as Google, and the quality of alternatives might be lower, but that doesn't make Google a monopoly. It just so happens Google is not close to being a monopoly.
Search: Yandex, Bing, Yahoo, Baidu.
And Facebook is nowhere close to having a monopoly on Social Networking websites.
Social Networking: LinkedIn, LiveJournal, Google Plus, Blogger, Reddit, Instagram, WhatsApp, MySpace, Twitter, Jaiku, Itsmy,
Because jamming creates a safety hazard for innocent people.
We should probably start by making assisting/aiding an incarcerated person's escape attempt, or facilitating a person in eluding authorities crimes punishable with much greater severity, instead of the current minor penalties. They should also depend on what crimes the escaped people committed.... springing an offender with a life sentence out of jail should land a minimum of 30 years on the violator.
Make it a misdemeanor just to fly a non-commercial aircraft within 500ft horizontal distance of a prison facility at a height of less than 1000ft.
Finally, they should employ means of detecting drones: monitor them closely, train their employees accordingly, and identify/pick up any dropped items --- basically, more vigilant guarding.
- There's a rush of intrusions into electronic payment systems
So who would you want to expose checking or savings information to the same potential risks?
- Mastercard can tell you spent $26 on toilet paper and USB sticks and they use that information to do evil things like ad campaigns
Your bank can do that too if you write a check, because, information sharing....
Or, do people just not care (or even know about) sound fidelity anymore...?
People care a bit about sound fidelity, But they don't care enough to spend an extra $1 per song.
Let them get their high-fidelity audio files for $0.05 per 3 minute song or 20 songs per $1, and people will buy it.
I often get pulled in on meetings where the software and hardware sales guys are courting the CIOs and other executives
Frankly: This is the opposite of how it should work.... The CIOs ought to be asking the Engineers what products to buy. Let the software/hardware sales guys court the Engineers, Design, and Security teams, but at the end of the day, the products be chosen based on technical merit, quality, lack of undesirable characteristics, and their ability to actually efficiently the meet business requirements.
"High school: To get your diploma, you have to show us your job offer first."
"Prospective employer: Sorry, to apply for this job, you have to show us your diploma first."
What happens when the sex robot breaks or the pedo gets bored of their robot and can't afford a new one? I would say some form of studies by scientists through formal (ethical) research is in order.
psychologists there believe that they help pedos to avoid interactions with real children.
This would mean less pedos in prison, which in the US, could mean a loss of revenue for private prisons due to lower inmate populations and loss of budget for various governmental entities who need number of convicted as a metric to justify budgets. Better ban the robots ahead of time to avoid the potential loss of $$$$. Also, by banning, a whole new crime will be created, thus allowing more sources of $$$$ for the powers that be, in the form of government dollars that will go towards enforcing these additional laws and contracted firms trying, convicting, sentencing, and carrying out those sentences.... jackpot
I suppose 20 years ago "noreply@" wasn't really standardized as an email bit bucket for domains
It's Not standardized. The Reply Address field is required by the RFC for a reason.
"Noreply@" is a convention adopted by some marketers trying to skirt the internet standards which require that all E-mail have a return path to communicate responses, error messages, and other technical issues: back to the person responsible for having sent the original e-mail. Providing this responsible sender information and the responsible party handling Notifications about technical issues with your e-mail delivery or Warnings/Abuse reports/complaints back to you is not optional.
Demanding that someone subsidize or provide you pen and paper is not.
I just demand fair, reasonable, non-discriminatory, and equitable access to purchase pen and paper (Or Internet access) without
being requested or required to sign over or waive any basic rights in the process, including the right to have disputes between me and a vendor mediated by the courts, and to pursue class action if damage or deception is committed against a large number of customers .
having an internet connection is not a right.
It is enough of a right that the supreme court ruled Social networking website bans for past sexual offenders unconstitutional.
A Swedish study showed that battery production emits between 150 kg and 200 kg of CO2 for each KW of capacity.
Production of ANY car yields CO2 because of electricity usage. If you already have a car, the best thing you can do will be to not buy a new one until it will be no longer economical to continue to service.
Perhaps, by then, there will be Nuclear or Solar energy powering all the production of electric cars, then the CO2 tonnage will be low.
There is no "skip" button.
By tricking the drone into thinking it has registered when it has not. MITM Attack, firmware or memory data modification, Etc
will just mod their drone so it doesn't squawk anything.
Which makes them easily detectable. "Drones that fail to identify flying more than 100ft high up or within 1000ft of any property other than the drone owner's private land can be shot down on sight"
Why would you use/need lead in a process producing silicon PV cells?
Emissions from PV Life Cycles
Check [3] Case 1 Emissions. And: "The high fraction
of direct Pb emission from material processing is related to
solar glass manufacturing, which accounts for about 80% of such Pb emission."
Try Recyling Nuclear waste.
Most nuclear waste could be and should have been reprocessed safely, but federal rules say No.
Solar panels don't contain lead.
However, lead and other toxic heavy metals may be necessary to be released during the overall production processes used to create the solar panels, so the production process can be said to include or contain these waste materials.
When I sell through eBay, I describe the item and set the price
You describe the item, But eBay sets requirements regarding what you can and cannot sell and restrictions on how you can settle the transaction -- for example eBay forces you to adhere to their processes and you are contractually prohibited against using eBay to find a buyer and then sell outside eBay, they also charge eBay fees based on the price and provide terms restricting what you can charge for additional services such as shipping.
eBay sets requirements regarding payment method, and you're required to accept PayPal which is owned by the same company as eBay. If a buyer claims they didn't get what they thought they'd get, then eBay or PayPal will decide what happens to the money.
Uber is not just a middleman. Uber runs the system.
I would call them an intermediary for services.... similar to how physical goods are sold through eBay.
What do you mean by "Uber runs the system?"
They provide an app that matches drivers with prospective passengers, mediates the relationships, and
processes the payments.
Same boss gave me a lecture on how security has no ROI.
Yes it does; its impact is just measured differently.
The payoff is mitigating risks of damages to the company that will be caused by various events, some of them infrequent, some of them frequent, some of them large, some of them small.
For each risk:
SLE (Single Loss event Cost) x annualized rate of occurrence (ARO) = ALE (Annualized Loss Expectancy)
Security measures help mitigate by reducing the expected SLE or decreasing the ARO.
that still do not meet the requirements of the 30 year old legislation.,
And then we have new establishments like Slashdot.org which requires answering a "CAPTCHA" which is deliberately obfuscated text inaccessible to people who are blind and deaf... It is almost as if they are TRYING to keep disabled people out of the community, so that they cannot comment on articles like this one.
If they're so essential, and Uber is a threat, then create a tax on ridesharing services and use the proceeds to subsidize accessible transportation (Including accessible transportation via ridesharing).
Let's put aside whether or not it is "fair" for Uber to have to provide (more) accessible services. Do other similar businesses have to conform to those standards?
The "most similar" businesses as transport companies are not really comparable to Uber, because those businesses own the vehicles, Or if they use 3rd party contractors, then they contract an entire fleet, And yes, Title III Americans with Disabilities act requires transportation companies to have "Accessible vehicles" available under some circumstances. And while there is no requirement that transportation companies have to provide the same wait time for the arrival of an accessible vehicle --- they are not allowed to require an extra fee from the user for the cost of removing barriers.
Uber is a bit different, because they are essentially acting as a middleman ---- Uber does not own any cars or employ the drivers. The individual drivers are businesses, but the individual drivers are also likely so small a business that they are exempt from the ADA ---- an individual Uber driver could legitimately make the argument that it would be fiscally irresponsible for them to spend $50,000 to outfit their car for wheelchair access. To be honest.... the only way it will be possible is if Uber provides them financial benefits to more than compensate for the added capital outlay and expensive frequent maintenance required.
Because the law says Uber cannot charge extra fees to the disabled user for barrier removal, then that means they must charge EVERY user of Uber extra fees to compensate.
"If you're a low-skilled worker with one of those jobs, $125 a month is a sizable amount of money,"
OK, we done screwed up with the minimum wage increase to $15... let's fix this.
Let's create a Minimum hours offering requirement - Minimum wage shall be $30 instead for an employee's first week of work with a new employer --- employers must allow employees to work at least 32 hours a week and may not interfere with or penalize an employee for working all 32 hours.
The minimum wage for an employee will increase from $15 to $20 per hour if during any given month, their average hours per week is less than 32, and if an employee works less than 32 hours per week average during a given calendar month, that employee's minimum wage will be increased by $1 times the difference between 32 and the average hours each employee worked for that entire month, and the employee must be paid that increased minimum for every hour worked during that month;
if the employee works less than 25 hours/week average, then an additional $1 is added to the minimum wage for the entire month for every hour they worked less than 25; if the employee works less than 20 hours, add another $1, etc....
Allow 50% of the hour-based increase to min. wage to be waived for work-at-home and autonomous/unsupervised jobs only, Or when the employer contributes for employee health insurance, disability insurance, life insurance, and pension accounts (Defined benefit plan) meeting requirements.