why pay more money to AT&T or Verizon when you can just buy more storage and play from your device with no issues
Because they own the platform you're working on. I'm guessing this change might piss them off, and ATT/Verizon might start wanting to rent you your phone again and bill you a monthly amount based on how much used storage space we have on our cell phones.
"due to the drones generally responding via a vertical controlled landing on the spot, or returning back to the starting point (assisting to track the operator)."
How do you know the bad guys won't reprogram their drones to continue the mission even if jammed; E.g. Continue on last known heading, or Upon loss of comms, immediately drop payload/self-destruct?
then it is equally legal for me to jam cellular phones as I drive down the internet because safety.
It's highly likely that a directional jammer will cause interference to nearby radio systems, possibly even cellphones.
I believe the answer is they can't, and company management And members of law enforcement who approved use of the device should go to jail the first time the product causes problems.
That the US government committed potentially criminal or unconstitutional acts doesn't somehow mean Snowden wouldn't be convicted.
Unless Snowden can prove those criminal or unconstitutional acts committed were life and death violence which Snowden's actions prevented, or committed directly against Snowden himself, then Snowden would probably lack legal standing to even challenge those acts, because of the way the US courts work; only the person who suffers direct damage resulting from the illegal act can make that argument against the government in court.
I suppose they think they could eliminate a cause of a proportion of colds, thus making them rarer. The rest would be just marketing, since all that is feasible to say about the common cold, is target some specific common causes to make them occur less often.
The "common cold" is really just a set of symptoms that might be related to any of over 200 viruses.
Because the common cold symptoms, most of them, are result of the Human body's defenses coming into play --- the body's standard natural response to infections of the respiratory system which evolved over millions of years, includes the inflammatory response and increase in mucus production, etc, and while the cold symptoms are uncomfortable, they're beneficial if the viral infection is a dangerous one.
In theory, curing the common cold would require coming up with a method to prevent or quickly eradicate any of thousands of possible viruses.
They could make him a member of an existing Russian ambassador to Norway's technical/administrative staff, however, so he doesn't need his own personal diplomatic accreditation.
Under the Vienna convention, the administrative staff members of a diplomat also have some immunity from being detained.
the Norwegian Supreme Court said it could not rule on the legality of any move to extradite Mr Snowden as the U.S. had so far made no such request.
I would speculate the request order has already been made and approved under seal that prevents the courts even learning that it exists, unless the order becomes effective, which only happens if Snowden comes into the country for the cheese (the prize) and springs the trap designed to catch him. Naturally, since it's not effective, it hasn't been unwrapped, thus there is no way to challenge it.
Also, i'm sure the order would activate and be executed so swiftly that by the time a challenge were even initiated, Snowden would already be in the US standing before the grand jury.
That's called moderation and is a reasonable activity for a site owner to undertake, in an open and transparent manner
Most websites DO moderation but NOT in a transparent manner. There's no time and resources for "Transparent manner"
(which may preclude 'shadowban', depending how Reddit interprets/implements that).
Shadowban is just Reddit's name for banning a user.
I believe at some time the site admins figured out that if they simply block an account from posting, then many trolls are likely to have registered a sockpuppet account, and just switch accounts upon discovering they're banned.
Shadowban makes it take longer by not revealing to the person they were banned, And they can post new comments to threads and such, But the banned users' comments do not appear for anyone else, and only the poster can see them.
Usenet can't be subverted by its owner because, as a decentralized service, it doesn't have one.
That's also its downfall.... too much spam and abuse, and there's no such thing as a team who can review posts, delete them, and block spammers.
On the other hand, each individual ISP/news provider can still censor content they don't want you to see, or tamper with posts; but there is just way too much spam/abuse for each news provider to create their own clean version.
Now what exactly happens to Germany if they change their mind once they have Snowden and hand him over to be executed by the US, hmm, nothing what so ever.
Snowden ought to get an arrangement negotiated where he can testify Via teleconference from a secured location without physically handing himself over.
There's no reason Snowden should have to risk it, in order to be able to testify.....
at the very least restorative damages would mean returning the money for everyone whose money was taken without delivery of the agreed-upon goods
Return all money spent on the falsely labelled product, NEXT if the company has any money or ability to borrow left over, require them to come up with money to pay for additional damages people might have incurred due to falsely believing they were applying the treatment they had decided.
* Pain, suffering, and any additional medication and medical costs compensation for injuries the people believed may have taken longer to heal or that had further complications which real Aloe might have prevented
* Compensation for driving costs, time, and money, required to purchase new products equivalent to bogus Aloe products.
* Compensation for lost peace of mind / extra costs required for each consumer to be able to spend more time, money, and services more thoroughly researching products of this necessary to detect fakes.
* Approval process for future products. Mandatory full disclosure of the content of future products brought for sale and methods of production.
* Forced monitoring of the company and partners' future products.
* Forced payments of the company of fees for periodic analysis of their products.
The unfortunate thing is that we probably have regulations that will limit the liability of WalMart when everyone sues them for this.
We need to get rid of such barriers and make sure that there is Unlimited liability for the fraud/fake products, and WalMart plus their suppliers can duke it out amongst themselves regarding what proportion of the damages belongs to each of them, as long as one of them who can pay makes good on it.
He's probably going to refuse to pardon Mrs. Clinton for the same reason, so he needs to at least maintain an appearance of consistency, otherwise, it will put Obama on the wrong side of history.
You just misunderstood. Here, let me fix it for you to what Obama means when he says "cannot pardon"
Obama replied: "It is contrary to my beliefs and policy to pardon somebody who hasn't gone before a court and presented themselves, so that's not something that I would comment on at this point.
The routers speak SNMP, so you can use a third-party tool if you prefer.
If you're a normal consumer, your chances of configuring a device over SNMP without the hardware vendor's software are about the chances of flipping a quarter and having it miraculously land standing on its side, perfectly balanced so you get neither head nor tails, and have that repeat 3 times in a row..
Ubiquiti APs and a wired router, but the best single solution is mikrotik for home use.
It's worth it to purchase the UniFi solution, even for home use: That is, if you're going to use wireless connectivity for anything critical that you may seriously depend on which requires connection reliability.
I would agree if your applications are just entertainment, occasional use, talking with friends, and messing about on Facebook, then no need to spend $$$ on a Real AP.
On the other hand, if you're doing home automation, security alarms, wireless cameras, etc. The UniFI AP's are not more than 3X as expensive, and the increase in performance, reliability and stability (that I see) is substantial.
I found the Ubiquiti UniFI AC access point (UAP-AC) and the Ubiquiti EdgeRouter Lite quite effective.
The EdgeRouter is my router; The wireless access point is mounted inside on the ceiling in the middle of the house at the apex it's powered using Power over Ethernet from a TP-Link switch, and from that one access point, there is full coverage with several hundred megabits of throughput from anywhere in the building, which is about 4000 square feet....
Congress passed the law, and the law only applies to Congress
NOPE. See U.S. v. Winstar Corp. and Justice David Souter quoted
The legislature, being in truth the sovereign power, is always of equal, always of absolute authority: it acknowledges no superior upon earth, which the prior legislature must have been, if it's [sic] ordinances could bind the present parliament.
Congress is not beholden to any decision made by a past congress.
That would be legislative entrenchment. The courts have ruled that congress cannot bind a future congress by forcing them to carry on policies of their choosing, not even by passing a law; that would be privileging earlier lawmakers over later ones, and no such privilege is allowed by the constitution.
Only something in the Constitution can limit congress or force them to do anything, not previous acts of congress.
Well... it's happened, and if you want it to stop, then a constitutional amendment will be required.
I would suggest....
Congress shall pass no law disbursing government-controlled money, assets, or collected taxes in the form of money, goods, or services to any person or entity, except in the form of a refund or rebate available to all citizens as a proportion to the amount of taxes collected from that person, or as necessary to support common good services beneficial to a majority of citizens and offered on an equal basis to all citizens with no wealth, income, location, field of endeavor, or means test; when a funded common good is service moneys provided for cultural products, scientific research, enrichment, or academics, all products, observations, complete datasets, designs, source code, notes, engineering results, analysis, pictures, multimedia productions, test data, and other final and intermediary results of that work shall be Non-patentable, Non-copyrightable, and shall be preserved and made available to the public and at no cost higher than the cost of archiving.
Any act or law already existing or that may be passed in the future which does not comply with these limitations shall be null and void, and in its entirety, not just the article or section in conflict, but always each entire law or act of congress is invalidated.
No.... a reasonable principle for a government to follow would be to require warnings, and let people make the choice; it's their personal information after all, they should be able to make informed consent, and accept the risk (to derive the gain), if they want.
Also... a reasonable protest would be to have an Internet-wide blackout where millions of the US-based websites that are most popular in Russia will of their own free will block access to all Russian IP addresses in protest of the censorship, and maintain the protest until Russia agrees to unblock Linkedin.
Consequently, it's not optional to have eight except for temporary purposes (like retiring judge)
That's a false "consequently". The Judiciary act of 1969 is not binding on congress. Also, for the same reason the "Line item veto" law was found unconstitutional ---- Congress is not capable of passing laws which impose restrictions or regulations on future acts of congress, not without approval of a constitutional amendment.
So while the Judiciary Act of 1969 calls for X justices; the Senate has the legal authority to refuse to allow portions of the act to be fully implemented which require their consent.
By the same token that Obamacare although a law, could have been effectively prevented from coming to affect just by failing to pass laws to provide necessary funding.
By the same token, the Senate can refuse to approve the appointment of necessary justices for the full implementation of such and such law.
You presumably have trained IT staff who can test a program in a test lab and see if it is ok,
Not really. Malware is good at evading detection under VM/test environments.
slows down the speed at which you can adopt new software
This is the major advantage that whitelisting provides --- slowing down the speed is mostly the major security benefit.
You aren't just searching the web, downloading, and rolling out programs willy nilly.... you have to wait, which throws away a lot of malware because you weren't willing to wait, or you didn't realize you were trying to deploy software in the first place (Windows UI issue), or you didn't realize you should be careful, by adding delays and slowing down the process, it adds a cost to deploying new software, which makes it likely you will do it less often, which reduces exposure.
Also, slowing down the deployment means emergent malware will more likely be detected by Antivirus (slowing down to wait for whitelisting gives Antivirus time to catch up); Rolling out new code too fast and not being careful enough about where it came from and the details, adds malware risk.
At home, there's nothing like that. How is a non-technical user to know if a program is evil or not?
You can simulate it. Do your due dilligence on the author and the website you get it from before you download and run their software. Only run software that is from either an established vendor, Or is open source, or has been out for more than a couple years and has a following.
Download and wait at least a few weeks before you run the new program. Check for news to make sure there's no new bad news about the program or its author.
Update and maintain realtime AV, and scan it before installing.
gpedit.msc Setup software restriction policies at computer level for non-admins to block program execution from C:\Users remove.LNK from denied list
Invaliding an FCC regulation would require legislative action by the congress, specifying what to chance, since the regulatory authority over these matters has been vested by congress with the FCC.
It's not like Trump would have the power to take office and unilaterally void all the FCC rules without any debate in the house.
Just like they got to deny Obama his Supreme Court appointee even though he still had a year left in his presidency.
Congress gets to set the number of justices on the court.
The Senate have the power to deny the president's appointees for all 4 years if they wanted; it's one of the legislative checks on the executive, that the president can only make selections that the Senate will consent to.
Obama could have gotten sneaky though and made an appointment when the Senate was in recess..... then the appointee to the court would be valid temporarily and immediately take office, until the end of the next session (Or permanent, if the Senate turned back and decided to vote to consent).
Slashdot Mirror
why pay more money to AT&T or Verizon when you can just buy more storage and play from your device with no issues
Because they own the platform you're working on. I'm guessing this change might piss them off, and ATT/Verizon might start wanting to rent you your phone again and bill you a monthly amount based on how much used storage space we have on our cell phones.
"due to the drones generally responding via a vertical controlled landing on the spot, or returning back to the starting point (assisting to track the operator)."
How do you know the bad guys won't reprogram their drones to continue the mission even if jammed; E.g. Continue on last known heading, or Upon loss of comms, immediately drop payload/self-destruct?
then it is equally legal for me to jam cellular phones as I drive down the internet because safety.
It's highly likely that a directional jammer will cause interference to nearby radio systems, possibly even cellphones.
I believe the answer is they can't, and company management And members of law enforcement who approved use of the device should go to jail the first time the product causes problems.
A better way would be to have trained police Eagles, or something.
That the US government committed potentially criminal or unconstitutional acts doesn't somehow mean Snowden wouldn't be convicted.
Unless Snowden can prove those criminal or unconstitutional acts committed were life and death violence which Snowden's actions prevented, or committed directly against Snowden himself, then Snowden would probably lack legal standing to even challenge those acts, because of the way the US courts work; only the person who suffers direct damage resulting from the illegal act can make that argument against the government in court.
I suppose they think they could eliminate a cause of a proportion of colds, thus making them rarer.
The rest would be just marketing, since all that is feasible to say about the common cold, is target some specific common causes to make them occur less often.
The "common cold" is really just a set of symptoms that might be related to any of over 200 viruses.
Because the common cold symptoms, most of them, are result of the Human body's defenses coming into play --- the body's standard natural response to infections of the respiratory system which evolved over millions of years, includes the inflammatory response and increase in mucus production, etc, and while the cold symptoms are uncomfortable, they're beneficial if the viral infection is a dangerous one.
In theory, curing the common cold would require coming up with a method to prevent or quickly eradicate any of thousands of possible viruses.
They could make him a member of an existing Russian ambassador to Norway's technical/administrative staff, however, so he doesn't need his own personal diplomatic accreditation.
Under the Vienna convention, the administrative staff members of a diplomat also have some immunity from being detained.
the Norwegian Supreme Court said it could not rule on the legality of any move to extradite Mr Snowden as the U.S. had so far made no such request.
I would speculate the request order has already been made and approved under seal that prevents the courts even learning that it exists, unless the order becomes effective, which only happens if Snowden comes into the country for the cheese (the prize) and springs the trap designed to catch him.
Naturally, since it's not effective, it hasn't been unwrapped, thus there is no way to challenge it.
Also, i'm sure the order would activate and be executed so swiftly that by the time a challenge were even initiated, Snowden would already be in the US standing before the grand jury.
That's called moderation and is a reasonable activity for a site owner to undertake, in an open and transparent manner
Most websites DO moderation but NOT in a transparent manner. There's no time and resources for "Transparent manner"
(which may preclude 'shadowban', depending how Reddit interprets/implements that).
Shadowban is just Reddit's name for banning a user.
I believe at some time the site admins figured out that if they simply block an account from posting, then many trolls are likely to have registered a sockpuppet account, and just switch accounts upon discovering they're banned.
Shadowban makes it take longer by not revealing to the person they were banned, And they can post new comments to threads and such, But the banned users' comments do not appear for anyone else, and only the poster can see them.
Usenet can't be subverted by its owner because, as a decentralized service, it doesn't have one.
That's also its downfall.... too much spam and abuse, and there's no such thing as a team who can review posts, delete them, and block spammers.
On the other hand, each individual ISP /news provider can still censor content they don't want you to see, or tamper with posts; but there is just way too much spam/abuse for each news provider to create their own clean version.
In response, he edited comments reading "fuck Spez" to instead be directed at moderators
He let them off easy. He should have just deleted the comments and applied a 30 day shadowban to the users.
Now what exactly happens to Germany if they change their mind once they have Snowden and hand him over to be executed by the US, hmm, nothing what so ever.
Snowden ought to get an arrangement negotiated where he can testify Via teleconference from a secured location without physically handing himself over.
There's no reason Snowden should have to risk it, in order to be able to testify.....
at the very least restorative damages would mean returning the money for everyone whose money was taken without delivery of the agreed-upon goods
Return all money spent on the falsely labelled product, NEXT if the company has any money or ability to borrow left over, require
them to come up with money to pay for additional damages people might have incurred due to falsely believing they were applying the
treatment they had decided.
* Pain, suffering, and any additional medication and medical costs compensation for injuries the people believed may have taken longer to heal or that had further complications which real Aloe might have prevented
* Compensation for driving costs, time, and money, required to purchase new products equivalent to bogus Aloe products.
* Compensation for lost peace of mind / extra costs required for each consumer to be able to spend more time, money, and services more thoroughly researching products of this necessary to detect fakes.
* Approval process for future products. Mandatory full disclosure of the content of future products brought for sale and methods of production.
* Forced monitoring of the company and partners' future products.
* Forced payments of the company of fees for periodic analysis of their products.
The unfortunate thing is that we probably have regulations that will limit the liability of WalMart when everyone sues them for this.
We need to get rid of such barriers and make sure that there is Unlimited liability for the fraud/fake products, and WalMart plus their suppliers can duke it out amongst themselves regarding what proportion of the damages belongs to each of them, as long as one of them who can pay makes good on it.
He's probably going to refuse to pardon Mrs. Clinton for the same reason, so he needs to at least maintain an appearance of consistency, otherwise, it will put Obama on the wrong side of history.
Not a liar
You just misunderstood. Here, let me fix it for you to what Obama means when he says "cannot pardon"
Obama replied: "It is contrary to my beliefs and policy to pardon somebody who hasn't gone before a court and presented themselves, so that's not something that I would comment on at this point.
The routers speak SNMP, so you can use a third-party tool if you prefer.
If you're a normal consumer, your chances of configuring a device over SNMP without the hardware vendor's software
are about the chances of flipping a quarter and having it miraculously land standing on its side, perfectly balanced so you get neither head nor tails, and have that repeat 3 times in a row..
Ubiquiti APs and a wired router, but the best single solution is mikrotik for home use.
It's worth it to purchase the UniFi solution, even for home use: That is, if you're going to use wireless connectivity for anything critical
that you may seriously depend on which requires connection reliability.
I would agree if your applications are just entertainment, occasional use, talking with friends, and messing about on Facebook, then no need to spend $$$ on a Real AP.
On the other hand, if you're doing home automation, security alarms, wireless cameras, etc.
The UniFI AP's are not more than 3X as expensive, and the increase in performance, reliability and stability (that I see) is substantial.
I found the Ubiquiti UniFI AC access point (UAP-AC) and the Ubiquiti EdgeRouter Lite quite effective.
The EdgeRouter is my router; The wireless access point is mounted inside on the ceiling in the middle of the house at the apex
it's powered using Power over Ethernet from a TP-Link switch, and from that one access point, there is full coverage with several hundred megabits
of throughput from anywhere in the building, which is about 4000 square feet....
Congress passed the law, and the law only applies to Congress
NOPE. See U.S. v. Winstar Corp. and Justice David Souter quoted
Congress is not beholden to any decision made by a past congress.
That would be legislative entrenchment. The courts have ruled that congress cannot bind a future congress by
forcing them to carry on policies of their choosing, not even by passing a law; that would be privileging earlier lawmakers over later ones,
and no such privilege is allowed by the constitution.
Only something in the Constitution can limit congress or force them to do anything, not previous acts of congress.
Well... it's happened, and if you want it to stop, then a constitutional amendment will be required.
I would suggest....
Congress shall pass no law disbursing government-controlled money, assets, or collected taxes in the form of money, goods, or services to any person or entity, except in the form of a refund or rebate available to all citizens as a proportion to the amount of taxes collected from that person, or as necessary to support common good services beneficial to a majority of citizens and offered on an equal basis to all citizens with no wealth, income, location, field of endeavor, or means test; when a funded common good is service moneys provided for cultural products, scientific research, enrichment, or academics, all products, observations, complete datasets, designs, source code, notes, engineering results, analysis, pictures, multimedia productions, test data, and other final and intermediary results of that work shall be Non-patentable, Non-copyrightable, and shall be preserved and made available to the public and at no cost higher than the cost of archiving.
Any act or law already existing or that may be passed in the future which does not comply with these limitations shall be null and void, and in its entirety, not just the article or section in conflict, but always each entire law or act of congress is invalidated.
No.... a reasonable principle for a government to follow would be to require warnings, and let people make the choice; it's their personal information after all, they should be able to make informed consent, and accept the risk (to derive the gain), if they want.
Also... a reasonable protest would be to have an Internet-wide blackout where millions of the US-based websites that are most popular in Russia will of their own free will block access to all Russian IP addresses in protest of the censorship, and maintain the protest until Russia agrees to unblock Linkedin.
Consequently, it's not optional to have eight except for temporary purposes (like retiring judge)
That's a false "consequently". The Judiciary act of 1969 is not binding on congress.
Also, for the same reason the "Line item veto" law was found unconstitutional ---- Congress is not capable of passing laws which impose restrictions or regulations on future acts of congress, not without approval of a constitutional amendment.
So while the Judiciary Act of 1969 calls for X justices; the Senate has the legal authority to refuse to allow portions of the act to be fully implemented which require their consent.
By the same token that Obamacare although a law, could have been effectively prevented from coming to affect just by failing to pass laws to provide necessary funding.
By the same token, the Senate can refuse to approve the appointment of necessary justices for the full implementation of such and such law.
You presumably have trained IT staff who can test a program in a test lab and see if it is ok,
Not really. Malware is good at evading detection under VM/test environments.
slows down the speed at which you can adopt new software
This is the major advantage that whitelisting provides --- slowing down the speed is mostly the major security benefit.
You aren't just searching the web, downloading, and rolling out programs willy nilly.... you have to wait, which throws away a lot of malware because you weren't willing to wait, or you didn't realize you were trying to deploy software in the first place (Windows UI issue), or you didn't realize you should be careful, by adding delays and slowing down the process, it adds a cost to deploying new software, which makes it likely you will do it less often, which reduces exposure.
Also, slowing down the deployment means emergent malware will more likely be detected by Antivirus (slowing down to wait for whitelisting gives Antivirus time to catch up); Rolling out new code too fast and not being careful enough about where it came from and the details, adds malware risk.
At home, there's nothing like that. How is a non-technical user to know if a program is evil or not?
You can simulate it. Do your due dilligence on the author and the website you get it from before you download and run their software. Only run software that is from either an established vendor, Or is open source, or has been out for more than a couple years and has a following.
Download and wait at least a few weeks before you run the new program. Check for news to make sure there's no new bad news about the program or its author.
Update and maintain realtime AV, and scan it before installing.
gpedit.msc Setup software restriction policies at computer level for non-admins to block program execution from C:\Users .LNK from denied list
remove
Invaliding an FCC regulation would require legislative action by the congress, specifying what to chance, since the regulatory authority over these matters has been vested by congress with the FCC.
It's not like Trump would have the power to take office and unilaterally void all the FCC rules without any debate in the house.
Just like they got to deny Obama his Supreme Court appointee even though he still had a year left in his presidency.
Congress gets to set the number of justices on the court.
The Senate have the power to deny the president's appointees for all 4 years if they wanted; it's one of the legislative checks on the
executive, that the president can only make selections that the Senate will consent to.
Obama could have gotten sneaky though and made an appointment when the Senate was in recess..... then the appointee to the court would be valid temporarily and immediately take office, until the end of the next session (Or permanent, if the Senate turned back and decided to vote to consent).