Has it ever bothered anyone else that IANAL looks so much like "I anal," and is that an invitation?
I just noticed this today, oddly, but it's bugging the hell out of me.
More on the point, there was no racist ripping, no your/you're/yor or their/there/I-like-my-cat confusion, so, yeah, this isn't very slashdotty. That said, those things are the things that people put out when they *post* on slashdot. I'd wager that readership is 20:1, at least.
Just because the sentencing was wrong doesn't mean the crime wasn't committed.
When the police fail to properly preserve the rights of a defendant by violating due process, the fruits of that violation are unavailable to the state in the prosecution of that defendant. When a judge violates due process by being corrupt, the fruits of that corruption (read: incarceration) should be unavailable to the state as well.
The state's penalty for allowing corruption within its ranks should necessarily be enormously high, strongly favoring the accused, because the state should be strongly compelled to operate constitutionally, ethically, legally, and morally.
More than just reviewing the cases to determine which should be retried, each and every conviction by this judge should be overturned, and the end effect will be that some rather unpleasant persons get a break. On balance, the societal cost of correcting a mistake (letting these kids out) should always be significantly higher than the individual cost of making the mistake (sending decent kids to prison). This motivates our society to avoid these mistakes in the first place.
I'll take analog blipping over MPEG dropped-p-frame-ing, but your point that the signal itself doesn't directly denote error-resistance is valid. What that signal causes a broadcaster to do (need to broadcast at a higher power) is the more important thing. It's worth noting that the FCC defines transmission power differently for NTSC and ATSC signals, so we can't be completely apples-to-apples on this.
The spectrum lets us know what the transmission power looks like (thinking about the integral of the spectral print of the signal), and it just plainly takes more energy to bring the ATSC pedestal up to NTSC luma-carrier levels. This matters for a few reasons:
1) NTSC is pretty robust to interference that isn't on its peaks. 2) White-space devices that don't use GPS for market detection are required to have only limited SNR sensitivity. They'll clobber any signal if they want to (they're orders of magnitude closer to the viewer), but they would want to less with NTSC signals (provided that the detection worked at all). 3) When you step on any piece of an ATSC signal, the house-of-cards MPEG transmission comes apart in a really painful way (over-the-air in inclement weather is a good way to experience this).
I quite happily welcome the ATSC transition, but white-space devices are going to clobber long-distance digital TV viewing badly. There isn't a big luma-carrier spike to detect and avoid with ATSC signals (see: this for pictures). It's going to be ugly.
First off, ATSC channels are the same 6MHz as NTSC channels.
Secondly, if you take a peek at a spectrum analyzer, you'll see a big, fat, non-peaky pedestal of signal for digital TV. It's about as immune to low-level interference as I am to ebola.
Thirdly, radio astromony is given a "big" empty space (channel 37).
Fourthly, the day that we call 100mW "low-level interference" is the day that we all, women included, have seven testicles.
Fifthly, these devices are so overpowered that they knock out cable TV.
Sixthly, there are ways (other frequencies, spread spectrum, burst transmission) to control high-bandwidth wireless devices wirelessly.
Seventhly, I had to go up to "sixthly." If you're really in the broadcast and communication "world" (do you mean industry?), you should consider boning up or getting out.
Since much of the current internet value is based in relatively open western nations, now would be a good time to legally restrict internet connectivity to nations that don't adhere to the treaty... scorched earth, basically.
So why invent weird classifications like "unlawful combatant"?
"In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be."
All it took to answer your post's question was your post (with some mark up).
You can claim the moral high-ground all you want by demonizing my style of communication rather than its content (you're still an idiot -grin-). The simple point is that there are massive differences and you did nothing but conflate two very different behaviors. If weaseling out of a stupid side of an argument were as easy as saying that the argument was beneath you... oh.. right.. america...
Anyone wanting to do more than gather information (journalism) or voice displeasure (peaceful protest) with a federal prosecutor is a grade-A moron. Providing public (or even private) information is not criminal. The things that people do with that information can be, but it's hardly inciting, conspiring, or even encouraging to post information harvested from google searches into slashdot.
I definitely encourage people to voice their displeasure with the policies of government with all of the parts of government that they interface with (once, don't harass people). There appears to be this ridiculous notion that government workers never forward issues on to their superiors and that all citizenry must voice everything through their own regional representation.
More to the point for Mr. Tamm, his whistle-blowing of a gross constitutional violation can only be viewed as a crime in the most obtuse of systems, and he's likely having his first, fourth, and sixth amendment rights violated as a result. This is the entire point of a free press.
Article six of the Constitution is pretty-darned ironclad. Any law that violates the Constitution just ain't a law. Furthermore, officers of the executive and judiciary are bound by oath to support the Constitution. Tamm held his patriotic and ethical duty above his job. Lawless, by this admittedly one-sided account, has done just the opposite.
You're an idiot. I used google to dig up public records information in, oh, five minutes. I also never screamed bloody murder about anything.
There is a massive difference between: - googling and wiretapping without a warrant. - using anywho to look up an address and seizing someone's property. - posting public information into slashdot and prosecutorial harassment. - a person investigating using public information and the government unlawfully obtaining private information. - the phone book (no expectation of privacy) and the phone (every expectation of privacy).
If someone wants to put my public information online, go wild. I'll give you a hint, my handle is my friggin' name.
What's my point of posting this information? It's just information. There's some humor in it, of course, but I honestly think that people should:
1. Investigate Lawless' side of the story (especially members of the new blog press). 2. Communicate lawfully their displeasure with what appears to be politically-motivated misconduct (be respectful, and, if he asks you not to contact him again, respect that as well). 3. Discuss openly (government actions flying under the radar started this).
That you can't see the massive difference between a communicative information-sharing populous and an invasive privacy-violating government shows how willfully incapable of reason you are.. oh.. right.. slashdot.
You don't think it's Jason Wesley Lawless of 43164 Crosswind Ter. Broadlands, VA 20148, born 12/31/1972 (birthday's coming up), at (571) 333-3347, do you?
It seems awfully stupid to go after a guy that the majority of Americans will end up calling a patriot when you haven't gone so far as to have an unlisted number. That said, there was a Jason W. Lawless, ADA, in Tennessee, and the Jason W. Lawless in Broadlands (DC suburb) did live in Nashville before. No doubt members of the press already know how to contact him...
I know that it's not direct-linked, but is it wise to get anything like this within 100 feet of Slashdot? Could we end up turning "down for the day" into "down for the week?"
Somewhere, someone is finding a way to report that this is good news for the economy. Someone else is finding a way to say that the use of USPS instead of FedEx is bad news for the economy.
Hopefully movie theaters and restaurants do it next.
If the problem is the noise or the light from the screens, kick people out for breaking the rules (one warning for light, no warnings for talking, for example), but I really don't want us to make a habit of jamming RF devices. That's a bit like banning alcohol to keep people from driving drunk. What if there's a fire? A crime? A doctor with an emergency who knows how to stand up and walk out when he gets a call?
Heavy-handed solutions create tons of problems. Ask people to behave like respectful adults and kick them out the moment they fail to do so.
I use virtualization for tons of stuff, but it really pays to have at least two machines handy in case something goes sour. Get a desktop and a laptop. Call it a day.
I have buckets of current computers around, but I mainly stick to a desktop, a laptop, and a server for all of my development. I could live with only two if I weren't doing pro audio/video.
The FCC tests were public, and everyone who had any contact with the tests, including Larry Page agreed that the devices interfered.
The only ones who called the test a success were the writers of the FCC report. Larry Page was crying foul about the tests being too hard ("rigged") right up until they issued their report because the devices interfered.
These things are going to knock out rural TV and get approved anyway or not get approved. If they don't get approved, we all lose. The bands auctioned off to Verizon and AT&T should have been the white-space playground for unlicensed devices and free networking. If the FCC had wanted to be really forward thinking, they would have opened up airwaves that were actually open.
Dude. I work for Sony (and desperately want these devices to work). My wife works for Shure. You can imagine how our arguments about this technology have gone.
Sure. 2 TV channels is 12MHz, and mics need between 100 and 500KHz each, but there's always intermodulation to ruin your day. Also, at a big event, with lots of broadcast coverage, you'll eat up 40 channels in no time. This is going to get really ugly really quickly.
We will have at least one of the following in the next couple of years:
- Interference that affects nearly everyone. - A somewhat-subjective standard that no devices pass FCC tests on. - An FCC reversal on this ruling.
So, TVBD's (whitespace devices) can operate on channels 21-51, except 37. So, wireless mics get 19 channels, minus TV presence. (37 is for radioastronomy)
Unless it's two fixed-location devices talking to each other, then TVBD's can operate on 2, and 5-20. In markets with PLMRS, two channels will be reserved for wireless mics. Um 2-4? Minus TV?
Except that TVBD's will be allowed to operate without geo-sensing, so they won't have any idea that they're in a PLMRS market. So, 2? Hello? Is this thing on?
These TVBD's have been shown to interfere with TV at 40mW, and we're talking about devices that operate at 100mW? So the lesson here kids is that you should never bother buying an FCC license. You should just buy the people that make the rules. I can't wait for devices that allow for cheap (free would be better) internet everywhere, but this is not the FCC doing its job. Verizon and AT&T must feel like suckers for pouring money into Auction 73. Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?
Is this meant to be a joke? Sony has been doing this for several years (and current Z notebooks allow you to switch without logging off or rebooting). This isn't particularly innovative at this point.
Macs are merely following the leads of others, putting the usual Jobs-ian spin on it, and making huge piles of money.
And I'm a programmer with a Macbook Pro. If you want to dev for the big 3 platforms (Windows, Linux, OS X) on one machine, it's the only (legal) way to go. It's possible to be realistic, though. Glass track-pad? Fairly innovative. Dual GPU? No.
True for most wireless microphone users, you mean.
There are available licenses, and they have been applied-for (and granted) to a number of individuals and production groups. Wait until a Superbowl interview goes something like "zzzzzzzzzzzzz bdkk fdd d chatta-chatta bzzzzzz." This is a simple case of the FCC being for sale, and the only real question here has been whether Kevin Martin is going to Google or Microsoft after this. Given what he looks like, I'd wager on Microsoft.
These devices screw up OTA TV, wireless mics, and, shockingly, cable TV.
Kevin Martin is a Bush-appointed political hack. I thought that Slashdot leaned decidedly against corrupt government acts like this. Anyone who isn't pro-corruption but still applauds this decision is just an idiot.
While I love the idea of free and open internet communication (unlikely if we farm this out to Google and Microsoft), if they plan on using the performances they've seen in FCC tests as the benchmark, you can expect even your cable TV to cut out. I absolutely love the concept, but the simple fact is that current versions of these devices don't work, and Kevin Martin is for sale.
I'd put $50 on him ending up at Google or Microsoft within a year of leaving the FCC. Anyone who talks with the people who were at the white-space device tests knows that these devices failed miserably. If you think the iPhone (or any GSM phone, honestly) next to your speakers is annoying, just wait for these puppies.
Slashdot Mirror
Has it ever bothered anyone else that IANAL looks so much like "I anal," and is that an invitation?
I just noticed this today, oddly, but it's bugging the hell out of me.
More on the point, there was no racist ripping, no your/you're/yor or their/there/I-like-my-cat confusion, so, yeah, this isn't very slashdotty. That said, those things are the things that people put out when they *post* on slashdot. I'd wager that readership is 20:1, at least.
Just because the sentencing was wrong doesn't mean the crime wasn't committed.
When the police fail to properly preserve the rights of a defendant by violating due process, the fruits of that violation are unavailable to the state in the prosecution of that defendant. When a judge violates due process by being corrupt, the fruits of that corruption (read: incarceration) should be unavailable to the state as well.
The state's penalty for allowing corruption within its ranks should necessarily be enormously high, strongly favoring the accused, because the state should be strongly compelled to operate constitutionally, ethically, legally, and morally.
More than just reviewing the cases to determine which should be retried, each and every conviction by this judge should be overturned, and the end effect will be that some rather unpleasant persons get a break. On balance, the societal cost of correcting a mistake (letting these kids out) should always be significantly higher than the individual cost of making the mistake (sending decent kids to prison). This motivates our society to avoid these mistakes in the first place.
I'll take analog blipping over MPEG dropped-p-frame-ing, but your point that the signal itself doesn't directly denote error-resistance is valid. What that signal causes a broadcaster to do (need to broadcast at a higher power) is the more important thing. It's worth noting that the FCC defines transmission power differently for NTSC and ATSC signals, so we can't be completely apples-to-apples on this.
The spectrum lets us know what the transmission power looks like (thinking about the integral of the spectral print of the signal), and it just plainly takes more energy to bring the ATSC pedestal up to NTSC luma-carrier levels. This matters for a few reasons:
1) NTSC is pretty robust to interference that isn't on its peaks.
2) White-space devices that don't use GPS for market detection are required to have only limited SNR sensitivity. They'll clobber any signal if they want to (they're orders of magnitude closer to the viewer), but they would want to less with NTSC signals (provided that the detection worked at all).
3) When you step on any piece of an ATSC signal, the house-of-cards MPEG transmission comes apart in a really painful way (over-the-air in inclement weather is a good way to experience this).
I quite happily welcome the ATSC transition, but white-space devices are going to clobber long-distance digital TV viewing badly. There isn't a big luma-carrier spike to detect and avoid with ATSC signals (see: this for pictures). It's going to be ugly.
At least it will be ugly in HD.
First off, ATSC channels are the same 6MHz as NTSC channels.
Secondly, if you take a peek at a spectrum analyzer, you'll see a big, fat, non-peaky pedestal of signal for digital TV. It's about as immune to low-level interference as I am to ebola.
Thirdly, radio astromony is given a "big" empty space (channel 37).
Fourthly, the day that we call 100mW "low-level interference" is the day that we all, women included, have seven testicles.
Fifthly, these devices are so overpowered that they knock out cable TV.
Sixthly, there are ways (other frequencies, spread spectrum, burst transmission) to control high-bandwidth wireless devices wirelessly.
Seventhly, I had to go up to "sixthly." If you're really in the broadcast and communication "world" (do you mean industry?), you should consider boning up or getting out.
This is what treaties are for.
Since much of the current internet value is based in relatively open western nations, now would be a good time to legally restrict internet connectivity to nations that don't adhere to the treaty... scorched earth, basically.
It deserves a ha ha...
I think we know why that happened. Slashdot should change the Gates image from borg-eyes to horns.
So why invent weird classifications like "unlawful combatant"?
"In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be."
All it took to answer your post's question was your post (with some mark up).
It appears... that defendants believe they can prevent the court from taking any action under 1806(f) by simply declining to act,' wrote Walker
Unless he's willing to put the attorneys in jail for failure to comply (and end up gitmo'd), there's not a lot that he can do.
I still have my fingers crossed, though.
Why would the Slashdot editors delete public information of a public official obtained from public sources?
Was there a black-friday 2-for-1 sale on bags of stupid that I didn't hear about?
You can claim the moral high-ground all you want by demonizing my style of communication rather than its content (you're still an idiot -grin-). The simple point is that there are massive differences and you did nothing but conflate two very different behaviors. If weaseling out of a stupid side of an argument were as easy as saying that the argument was beneath you... oh.. right.. america...
Anyone wanting to do more than gather information (journalism) or voice displeasure (peaceful protest) with a federal prosecutor is a grade-A moron. Providing public (or even private) information is not criminal. The things that people do with that information can be, but it's hardly inciting, conspiring, or even encouraging to post information harvested from google searches into slashdot.
I definitely encourage people to voice their displeasure with the policies of government with all of the parts of government that they interface with (once, don't harass people). There appears to be this ridiculous notion that government workers never forward issues on to their superiors and that all citizenry must voice everything through their own regional representation.
More to the point for Mr. Tamm, his whistle-blowing of a gross constitutional violation can only be viewed as a crime in the most obtuse of systems, and he's likely having his first, fourth, and sixth amendment rights violated as a result. This is the entire point of a free press.
Article six of the Constitution is pretty-darned ironclad. Any law that violates the Constitution just ain't a law. Furthermore, officers of the executive and judiciary are bound by oath to support the Constitution. Tamm held his patriotic and ethical duty above his job. Lawless, by this admittedly one-sided account, has done just the opposite.
You're an idiot. I used google to dig up public records information in, oh, five minutes. I also never screamed bloody murder about anything.
There is a massive difference between:
- googling and wiretapping without a warrant.
- using anywho to look up an address and seizing someone's property.
- posting public information into slashdot and prosecutorial harassment.
- a person investigating using public information and the government unlawfully obtaining private information.
- the phone book (no expectation of privacy) and the phone (every expectation of privacy).
If someone wants to put my public information online, go wild. I'll give you a hint, my handle is my friggin' name.
What's my point of posting this information? It's just information. There's some humor in it, of course, but I honestly think that people should:
1. Investigate Lawless' side of the story (especially members of the new blog press).
2. Communicate lawfully their displeasure with what appears to be politically-motivated misconduct (be respectful, and, if he asks you not to contact him again, respect that as well).
3. Discuss openly (government actions flying under the radar started this).
That you can't see the massive difference between a communicative information-sharing populous and an invasive privacy-violating government shows how willfully incapable of reason you are.. oh.. right.. slashdot.
You don't think it's Jason Wesley Lawless of 43164 Crosswind Ter. Broadlands, VA 20148, born 12/31/1972 (birthday's coming up), at (571) 333-3347, do you?
It seems awfully stupid to go after a guy that the majority of Americans will end up calling a patriot when you haven't gone so far as to have an unlisted number. That said, there was a Jason W. Lawless, ADA, in Tennessee, and the Jason W. Lawless in Broadlands (DC suburb) did live in Nashville before. No doubt members of the press already know how to contact him...
I know that it's not direct-linked, but is it wise to get anything like this within 100 feet of Slashdot? Could we end up turning "down for the day" into "down for the week?"
Somewhere, someone is finding a way to report that this is good news for the economy. Someone else is finding a way to say that the use of USPS instead of FedEx is bad news for the economy.
Hopefully movie theaters and restaurants do it next.
If the problem is the noise or the light from the screens, kick people out for breaking the rules (one warning for light, no warnings for talking, for example), but I really don't want us to make a habit of jamming RF devices. That's a bit like banning alcohol to keep people from driving drunk. What if there's a fire? A crime? A doctor with an emergency who knows how to stand up and walk out when he gets a call?
Heavy-handed solutions create tons of problems. Ask people to behave like respectful adults and kick them out the moment they fail to do so.
I use virtualization for tons of stuff, but it really pays to have at least two machines handy in case something goes sour. Get a desktop and a laptop. Call it a day.
I have buckets of current computers around, but I mainly stick to a desktop, a laptop, and a server for all of my development. I could live with only two if I weren't doing pro audio/video.
AT&T DSL, but the point is taken. We're being screwed on all fronts.
I meant specific devices, but, yes, it is only a matter of time. Me? I'll just watch Hulu, but I understand why this is a bad thing to do.
The FCC tests were public, and everyone who had any contact with the tests, including Larry Page agreed that the devices interfered.
The only ones who called the test a success were the writers of the FCC report. Larry Page was crying foul about the tests being too hard ("rigged") right up until they issued their report because the devices interfered .
These things are going to knock out rural TV and get approved anyway or not get approved. If they don't get approved, we all lose. The bands auctioned off to Verizon and AT&T should have been the white-space playground for unlicensed devices and free networking. If the FCC had wanted to be really forward thinking, they would have opened up airwaves that were actually open.
Dude. I work for Sony (and desperately want these devices to work). My wife works for Shure. You can imagine how our arguments about this technology have gone.
Yes, they're hiring. So are we, actually.
Sure. 2 TV channels is 12MHz, and mics need between 100 and 500KHz each, but there's always intermodulation to ruin your day. Also, at a big event, with lots of broadcast coverage, you'll eat up 40 channels in no time. This is going to get really ugly really quickly.
We will have at least one of the following in the next couple of years:
- Interference that affects nearly everyone.
- A somewhat-subjective standard that no devices pass FCC tests on.
- An FCC reversal on this ruling.
All of these are really bad.
So, TVBD's (whitespace devices) can operate on channels 21-51, except 37.
So, wireless mics get 19 channels, minus TV presence. (37 is for radioastronomy)
Unless it's two fixed-location devices talking to each other, then TVBD's can operate on 2, and 5-20. In markets with PLMRS, two channels will be reserved for wireless mics.
Um 2-4? Minus TV?
Except that TVBD's will be allowed to operate without geo-sensing, so they won't have any idea that they're in a PLMRS market.
So, 2? Hello? Is this thing on?
These TVBD's have been shown to interfere with TV at 40mW, and we're talking about devices that operate at 100mW? So the lesson here kids is that you should never bother buying an FCC license. You should just buy the people that make the rules. I can't wait for devices that allow for cheap (free would be better) internet everywhere, but this is not the FCC doing its job. Verizon and AT&T must feel like suckers for pouring money into Auction 73. Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?
Is this meant to be a joke? Sony has been doing this for several years (and current Z notebooks allow you to switch without logging off or rebooting). This isn't particularly innovative at this point.
Macs are merely following the leads of others, putting the usual Jobs-ian spin on it, and making huge piles of money.
And I'm a programmer with a Macbook Pro. If you want to dev for the big 3 platforms (Windows, Linux, OS X) on one machine, it's the only (legal) way to go. It's possible to be realistic, though. Glass track-pad? Fairly innovative. Dual GPU? No.
True for most wireless microphone users, you mean.
There are available licenses, and they have been applied-for (and granted) to a number of individuals and production groups. Wait until a Superbowl interview goes something like "zzzzzzzzzzzzz bdkk fdd d chatta-chatta bzzzzzz." This is a simple case of the FCC being for sale, and the only real question here has been whether Kevin Martin is going to Google or Microsoft after this. Given what he looks like, I'd wager on Microsoft.
These devices screw up OTA TV, wireless mics, and, shockingly, cable TV.
Kevin Martin is a Bush-appointed political hack. I thought that Slashdot leaned decidedly against corrupt government acts like this. Anyone who isn't pro-corruption but still applauds this decision is just an idiot.
While I love the idea of free and open internet communication (unlikely if we farm this out to Google and Microsoft), if they plan on using the performances they've seen in FCC tests as the benchmark, you can expect even your cable TV to cut out. I absolutely love the concept, but the simple fact is that current versions of these devices don't work, and Kevin Martin is for sale.
I'd put $50 on him ending up at Google or Microsoft within a year of leaving the FCC. Anyone who talks with the people who were at the white-space device tests knows that these devices failed miserably. If you think the iPhone (or any GSM phone, honestly) next to your speakers is annoying, just wait for these puppies.