Yeah, pretty much. The "conservatives" on the court have just remade the rules of evidence so that the the absense of evidence can be used in place of evidence. Guilt by accusation!
The vast majority of Verizon's (and any US carrier's) calls are from one US number to another US number. They could just have requested all phone calls from/to a short list of foreign numbers. Or at most they would have asked for all calls to/from a list of foreign countries. That's still a lot of calls but hundreds of times less than the full call database. Then, once they had identified a US number that seems associated with foreign terrorists, they could examine all calls to/from that number and tap the line.
The court order says every call. Why would a judge give them that level of access if all they wanted was calls to/from a handful of numbers? Bottom line, the story the Congressman is telling is completely at odds with what we now know about the extent of the information the NSA requested and received.
Well, yes but in fact the courts have no real power to stop either Congress or the President if they decide to ignore them. It's not like they have officers they can send around to lock up Congress or the President. Their power is good as long as the other branches are willing to respect their decisions.
'the president had the constitutional authority, no matter what the law actually says, to order domestic spying without [constitutional] warrants,'
This quote suggests two (independent) things:
1) that the constitution authorizes the president to order domestic spying.
2) that congress can [in essence] make no law that the president must obey (short of modifying the constitution).
Is that actually true? It would mean that when Bush (and Obama) made signing statements that they didn't need to follow certain laws, they were 100% correct. It means Reagan acted 100% legally in Iran Contra. It means that even if Obama directly ordered the IRS to harass certain groups, it was 100% legal. That's kind of scary.
No, it's not the least bit true. The fact is that the Constitution specifically forbids spying without a warrant, and that the Congress can remove a President if they find his exercise of power to be illegal. But it's also a fact that unless Congress acts the President as a practical matter can and will flout the law.
Yeah, those hundred thousand employees would have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO if they didn't work for Oracle, because apparently according to you software designers and programmers and salespeople basically have no value until some industrialist tells them what to do.
They're called "rare earth" elements because they can only be economically mined from "rare earth" minerals that actually are pretty rare to find in industrially-useful quantities. Other than those uncommon minerals, they are found in tiny concentrations that are impractical to refine.
I don't know what explains anyone's idea, however, that they would be easier to mine from asteroids. Are they more abundant in meteorites than in the Earth's crust?
(c) put a piece of tape or a conveniently placed object in front of the camera?
Why should 5% be forbidden to have/use a technology that they want for whatever reason because some others don't want it in their homes? What kind of Nanny-State thinking is that?
Ellison is one of the more productive people in the world, he was able to devise a machine that is his company, that makes him one of the most productive people out there. All of his employees, all of his properties, they are all extensions of this machine.
I'd put it a little differently. Ellison is a very clever man who has devised a way of diverting a fraction of the productivity of over 100,000 people into his pocket. That way is the Oracle Corporation. Indirectly, his company diverts a fraction of the productivity of about 390,000 corporate customers comprising the efforts of millions of people into his pocket.
Nobody ever accumulated great wealth any other way. The most you can ever achieve from your own productivity is to be moderately comfortable.
Seriously? Who is going to pave the roads in your city where the property belongs to thousands to millions of people and companies instead of just one?
It sounds to me like what Ellison is trying to create is a modern fiefdom in Lanai. Maybe the next thing you'll hear of him is referring to himself as the Prince of Lanai.
That's theology speaking, not a straight reading of the stories. Yes, he remained silent to most of the charges. But was that "wanting to be martyred" or simple recognition that he was in a kangaroo court (miraculously, hundreds of years before any Jew or Roman knew of Australia) and anything he said would make no difference?
According to the gospels, he was convicted of being such, though they are pretty insistent on the point that he was convicted based on false and contradictory testimony and that his accusers were politically motivated.
I thought it was because of the sacrifices to Janus, sadly a mostly-forgotten god, only commemorated these days in the month of January, the honorable job of Janitor (keeper of the keys) and the admonition to look both ways before you cross the street.
If WiMax's range is 50km, that means from 20,000 feet it covers an 18-mile across footprint. That would just be from a single transponder. You could design the satellite with multiple overlapping beams, each designed to cover about a 200 square mile area. It would be pretty effective out to a range of about 20 miles. At that distance, multipath and coverage in valleys starts to become a problem. So one balloon could cover maybe as much as 1200 square miles.
You're just wrong. Nobody wants ads that are more intrusive than they already are, or they want them to be less intrusive. But if you're watching TV, they're GOING to show you ads, and they're going to have audio and video because that's the medium. Most people don't particularly care what ads, as long as those ads aren't more annoying than average, therefore most people won't care if the ads they get are targeted, and most people won't think twice about walking scantily dressed or naked or having sex in front of an active webcam.
When you do a web search, you see lots of ads. Your search results are full of them. On Google, they're all over the right sidebar. They call them sponsored links, but they're targeted ads. On Bing, which is the 2nd most used search engine in the USA, they're all over the page, as they are on Yahoo!
Slashdot Mirror
Time to impeach five "Justices."
Yeah, pretty much. The "conservatives" on the court have just remade the rules of evidence so that the the absense of evidence can be used in place of evidence. Guilt by accusation!
The vast majority of Verizon's (and any US carrier's) calls are from one US number to another US number. They could just have requested all phone calls from/to a short list of foreign numbers. Or at most they would have asked for all calls to/from a list of foreign countries. That's still a lot of calls but hundreds of times less than the full call database. Then, once they had identified a US number that seems associated with foreign terrorists, they could examine all calls to/from that number and tap the line.
The court order says every call. Why would a judge give them that level of access if all they wanted was calls to/from a handful of numbers? Bottom line, the story the Congressman is telling is completely at odds with what we now know about the extent of the information the NSA requested and received.
Well, yes but in fact the courts have no real power to stop either Congress or the President if they decide to ignore them. It's not like they have officers they can send around to lock up Congress or the President. Their power is good as long as the other branches are willing to respect their decisions.
'the president had the constitutional authority, no matter what the law actually says, to order domestic spying without [constitutional] warrants,'
This quote suggests two (independent) things: 1) that the constitution authorizes the president to order domestic spying. 2) that congress can [in essence] make no law that the president must obey (short of modifying the constitution). Is that actually true? It would mean that when Bush (and Obama) made signing statements that they didn't need to follow certain laws, they were 100% correct. It means Reagan acted 100% legally in Iran Contra. It means that even if Obama directly ordered the IRS to harass certain groups, it was 100% legal. That's kind of scary.
No, it's not the least bit true. The fact is that the Constitution specifically forbids spying without a warrant, and that the Congress can remove a President if they find his exercise of power to be illegal. But it's also a fact that unless Congress acts the President as a practical matter can and will flout the law.
Yeah, those hundred thousand employees would have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO if they didn't work for Oracle, because apparently according to you software designers and programmers and salespeople basically have no value until some industrialist tells them what to do.
They're called "rare earth" elements because they can only be economically mined from "rare earth" minerals that actually are pretty rare to find in industrially-useful quantities. Other than those uncommon minerals, they are found in tiny concentrations that are impractical to refine.
I don't know what explains anyone's idea, however, that they would be easier to mine from asteroids. Are they more abundant in meteorites than in the Earth's crust?
Why should 5% be forbidden to have/use a technology that they want for whatever reason because some others don't want it in their homes? What kind of Nanny-State thinking is that?
This is the first time I've ever heard the term "benevolent" in relation to Larry Ellison. Not the first time I've heard him called a dictator.
Ellison is one of the more productive people in the world, he was able to devise a machine that is his company, that makes him one of the most productive people out there. All of his employees, all of his properties, they are all extensions of this machine.
I'd put it a little differently. Ellison is a very clever man who has devised a way of diverting a fraction of the productivity of over 100,000 people into his pocket. That way is the Oracle Corporation. Indirectly, his company diverts a fraction of the productivity of about 390,000 corporate customers comprising the efforts of millions of people into his pocket.
Nobody ever accumulated great wealth any other way. The most you can ever achieve from your own productivity is to be moderately comfortable.
Seriously? Who is going to pave the roads in your city where the property belongs to thousands to millions of people and companies instead of just one?
It sounds to me like what Ellison is trying to create is a modern fiefdom in Lanai. Maybe the next thing you'll hear of him is referring to himself as the Prince of Lanai.
That's theology speaking, not a straight reading of the stories. Yes, he remained silent to most of the charges. But was that "wanting to be martyred" or simple recognition that he was in a kangaroo court (miraculously, hundreds of years before any Jew or Roman knew of Australia) and anything he said would make no difference?
The irony of this is that today I have mod points, and I'd mod you up if I could.
another big difference: My company has development schedules.
Over 78000 in less than a week is pretty fast. The first couple days were really fast.
According to the gospels, he was convicted of being such, though they are pretty insistent on the point that he was convicted based on false and contradictory testimony and that his accusers were politically motivated.
They also invented the idea of Senators. Obviously not all of their long-lasting creations turned out to be useful.
I thought it was because of the sacrifices to Janus, sadly a mostly-forgotten god, only commemorated these days in the month of January, the honorable job of Janitor (keeper of the keys) and the admonition to look both ways before you cross the street.
They crucified Jesus and burned a lot of Christians. Does that count?
That's not the only problem. The root of the problem is that iron wants to react with the concrete. Nice article on it here: http://www.cticonsultants.com.au/CTI%20Technical%20Note%20C1.pdf and an article about preventing it is here: http://www.concretecorrosion.net/html_en/maitrise/contenu.htm
Indeed. Maybe we could call them Lanthanides, instead.
scandium and yttrium are called "rare earths" but they aren't lanthanides.
If WiMax's range is 50km, that means from 20,000 feet it covers an 18-mile across footprint. That would just be from a single transponder. You could design the satellite with multiple overlapping beams, each designed to cover about a 200 square mile area. It would be pretty effective out to a range of about 20 miles. At that distance, multipath and coverage in valleys starts to become a problem. So one balloon could cover maybe as much as 1200 square miles.
You're just wrong. Nobody wants ads that are more intrusive than they already are, or they want them to be less intrusive. But if you're watching TV, they're GOING to show you ads, and they're going to have audio and video because that's the medium. Most people don't particularly care what ads, as long as those ads aren't more annoying than average, therefore most people won't care if the ads they get are targeted, and most people won't think twice about walking scantily dressed or naked or having sex in front of an active webcam.
When you do a web search, you see lots of ads. Your search results are full of them. On Google, they're all over the right sidebar. They call them sponsored links, but they're targeted ads. On Bing, which is the 2nd most used search engine in the USA, they're all over the page, as they are on Yahoo!
Did I say they were using helium? No I did not. Why are you asking me?
Why isn't anyone tapping into Moore's Law for the moon?
Maybe because moon bases and rockets mostly aren't made of transistors.