No, seriously. Is there ANYTHING left that requires a warrant anymore, that can't just be bypassed with some "We thought he might be an immediate threat/terrorist" line?
If you are in the US, anyway, your strings are your vote, and that's about it. It's a democracy
An no U.S. politician in their right mind is going to throw money at a project built outside the U.S., unless there are serious strings attached about how much of the construction will go to American firms, how many Americans will be hired, etc. Money always comes with strings attached.
Letting the victims freeze their credit for free would do it - actually EVERYONE should be able to do that for free!
South Carolina already has that. By law, anyone can freeze their credit for free with the three major credit reporting services at any time for free (and unfreeze, freeze again, etc. for free too).
They're private businesses, not government agencies.
Funny, but that's not the song that Bank of America (among others) sings when it needs a government bailout. AFAIC, the entire banking structure of the U.S. is now a government agency. Too big to fail, you know.
I looked into some of those lease companies. They all told me their leases weren't available in my area. I gathered they only offered them in states like CA, where they get back significant subsidies from the state.
Looked into solar panels for my little house. Was going to run about $28,000 up front. At that rate it would take about 17 years to pay for itself, and that's assuming that there is absolutely no maintenance, repair, battery replacement, etc. during those 17 years. And, even with that, I don't have $28,000--and a loan would mean interest, which would probably mean it would NEVER pay for itself.
Uh...it's still there, you know
on
The Web We Lost
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Most of the stuff this guy is bitching about is stuff that is STILL THERE. You can still create your own website and post whatever the hell you like, create whatever community you damn well please, etc. Unless you're in a country like China or Iran, you have every bit as much freedom today on the internet as you did 10 or 15 years ago.
Just because people CHOOSE to use social sites like Facebook and give up certain freedoms in the process doesn't mean anything has been lost. About the only area where I see where freedom has really been lost is in the increasing prevalence of tablets, phones, and likely soon even laptops that are behind software "walled gardens," like iOS. And even if that case, no one is *forcing* anyone to buy those devices.
And as for complaining about the lack of standards in sites sharing info, well WTF is new? Companies developing proprietary formats for sharing info is hardly something that Twitter just discovered recently.
To me this guy just sounds like another FOSS zealot bitching because the world doesn't work like he wants it to, and things didn't turn out like the Open Source utopia he had envisioned in 2000.
I just worry that its increasing popularity is going to bring in the scammers and con men. Any venture where honesty is important and there is money to be made seems to ultimately attract them.
No it doesn't. The FCC does not, and cannot, regulate cable. This law only applies to over-the-air channels, NOT cable channels. That's what all that "pursuant to the Communications Act of 1934" crap is about.
I imagine it would be technically trivial to simply require that *both* numbers link to emergency services. It would be easy to do, and would make things a lot safer for visitors in either America or Europe who may only be familiar with one or the other.
Easy peasy, and no argument needed.
Of course, this is the U.N. we're talking about here, so OF COURSE there will be an argument. And it will no doubt break down fairly quickly into an old-resentment pissing contest between Europe and America, with both sides engaging in increasingly hyperbolic rhetoric and the end result being both sides telling the other to sod off. It will probably be considered a success if four additional numbers don't get proposed by countries who hate the West in general.
I actually went to grad school with a woman who later got caught doing something similar. There is a lot of pressure to publish in academia, even at the grad level these days (especially with so much competition now for the few tenure-track positions available).
When I was in academia, there were all these promises of baby boomers retiring and the fields opening up to new blood, but all I saw was a profession getting more and more cutthroat, with fewer and fewer opportunities for any future. Ended up seeing some pretty questionable activities going on. One of the most prominent was the proliferation of smaller academic "journals" that were little more than conglomerations of local grad students and profs looking to publish their own papers under the guise of a supposedly peer-reviewed journal (with the "peers" being themselves and their friends). I wanted no part of it myself, but the temptation was there for a lot of my fellow academics.
There is also the temptation to publish a lot of really conventional stuff that basically just takes someone else's work and modifies it slightly, or applies it to a slightly different framework. This is the academic equivalent of shovelware. Professor Hot Shit publishes some groundbreaking work, and for the next 20 years you get hundreds of knockoff articles from ass-kissing, unoriginal grad students and nontenured profs basically just parroting Hot Shit's work. Tends to produce a LOT of groupthink in academia (at least until the next Hot Shit comes along). At least 99% of the articles and papers coming out in my field fell into this category. You could actually be seriously be penalized for coming up with original arguments if you didn't have the established cred (and tenure) to challenge the reigning Prof. Hot Shit. Saw another fellow grad student basically drumheaded out of the field for challenging the ideas of a prominent professor in the department. Big mistake.
Fine as *one* backup location, fine for non-critical data and apps, fine for anything that won't be particularly missed if it goes offline for a while.
Politically speaking, about the only way to do that would be to get the defense contractors on board (since they all but own Congress outright). Unless Congress puts Northrop Grumman in charge of building the craft, Blackwater (or whatever they're calling themselves this week) in charge of moon security, and KBR in charge of moon logistics, you can forget diverting any money from defense.
Slashdot Mirror
No, seriously. Is there ANYTHING left that requires a warrant anymore, that can't just be bypassed with some "We thought he might be an immediate threat/terrorist" line?
late 70's muscle car
There is no such thing.
If you are in the US, anyway, your strings are your vote, and that's about it. It's a democracy
An no U.S. politician in their right mind is going to throw money at a project built outside the U.S., unless there are serious strings attached about how much of the construction will go to American firms, how many Americans will be hired, etc. Money always comes with strings attached.
RTFS, Bank of America is one of the processors cited.
Are they asking for my permission?
Because if you've got the money, knock yourself out. Just don't come looking for my tax dollars unless you want my strings attached.
Letting the victims freeze their credit for free would do it - actually EVERYONE should be able to do that for free!
South Carolina already has that. By law, anyone can freeze their credit for free with the three major credit reporting services at any time for free (and unfreeze, freeze again, etc. for free too).
They're private businesses, not government agencies.
Funny, but that's not the song that Bank of America (among others) sings when it needs a government bailout. AFAIC, the entire banking structure of the U.S. is now a government agency. Too big to fail, you know.
thus freeing humans to pursue nobler interests.
Yeah, we'll have plenty of time on our hands to pursue interests like huddling around trashcan fires, stealing food, and begging for change.
I looked into some of those lease companies. They all told me their leases weren't available in my area. I gathered they only offered them in states like CA, where they get back significant subsidies from the state.
Looked into solar panels for my little house. Was going to run about $28,000 up front. At that rate it would take about 17 years to pay for itself, and that's assuming that there is absolutely no maintenance, repair, battery replacement, etc. during those 17 years. And, even with that, I don't have $28,000--and a loan would mean interest, which would probably mean it would NEVER pay for itself.
Most of the stuff this guy is bitching about is stuff that is STILL THERE. You can still create your own website and post whatever the hell you like, create whatever community you damn well please, etc. Unless you're in a country like China or Iran, you have every bit as much freedom today on the internet as you did 10 or 15 years ago.
Just because people CHOOSE to use social sites like Facebook and give up certain freedoms in the process doesn't mean anything has been lost. About the only area where I see where freedom has really been lost is in the increasing prevalence of tablets, phones, and likely soon even laptops that are behind software "walled gardens," like iOS. And even if that case, no one is *forcing* anyone to buy those devices.
And as for complaining about the lack of standards in sites sharing info, well WTF is new? Companies developing proprietary formats for sharing info is hardly something that Twitter just discovered recently.
To me this guy just sounds like another FOSS zealot bitching because the world doesn't work like he wants it to, and things didn't turn out like the Open Source utopia he had envisioned in 2000.
I just worry that its increasing popularity is going to bring in the scammers and con men. Any venture where honesty is important and there is money to be made seems to ultimately attract them.
No it doesn't. The FCC does not, and cannot, regulate cable. This law only applies to over-the-air channels, NOT cable channels. That's what all that "pursuant to the Communications Act of 1934" crap is about.
Only applies to over-the-air broadcasters, no cable channels
Allows for a one year exemption for anyone requesting.
Does not apply to any commercials put in by your cable or satellite provider
There are no real provisions for fines or enforcement.
16:9 is very close to the 1.85:1 cinematic standard, which is still far more common than 2.35:1.
I imagine it would be technically trivial to simply require that *both* numbers link to emergency services. It would be easy to do, and would make things a lot safer for visitors in either America or Europe who may only be familiar with one or the other.
Easy peasy, and no argument needed.
Of course, this is the U.N. we're talking about here, so OF COURSE there will be an argument. And it will no doubt break down fairly quickly into an old-resentment pissing contest between Europe and America, with both sides engaging in increasingly hyperbolic rhetoric and the end result being both sides telling the other to sod off. It will probably be considered a success if four additional numbers don't get proposed by countries who hate the West in general.
Where does it end, people?!?!?
LOL
I actually went to grad school with a woman who later got caught doing something similar. There is a lot of pressure to publish in academia, even at the grad level these days (especially with so much competition now for the few tenure-track positions available).
When I was in academia, there were all these promises of baby boomers retiring and the fields opening up to new blood, but all I saw was a profession getting more and more cutthroat, with fewer and fewer opportunities for any future. Ended up seeing some pretty questionable activities going on. One of the most prominent was the proliferation of smaller academic "journals" that were little more than conglomerations of local grad students and profs looking to publish their own papers under the guise of a supposedly peer-reviewed journal (with the "peers" being themselves and their friends). I wanted no part of it myself, but the temptation was there for a lot of my fellow academics.
There is also the temptation to publish a lot of really conventional stuff that basically just takes someone else's work and modifies it slightly, or applies it to a slightly different framework. This is the academic equivalent of shovelware. Professor Hot Shit publishes some groundbreaking work, and for the next 20 years you get hundreds of knockoff articles from ass-kissing, unoriginal grad students and nontenured profs basically just parroting Hot Shit's work. Tends to produce a LOT of groupthink in academia (at least until the next Hot Shit comes along). At least 99% of the articles and papers coming out in my field fell into this category. You could actually be seriously be penalized for coming up with original arguments if you didn't have the established cred (and tenure) to challenge the reigning Prof. Hot Shit. Saw another fellow grad student basically drumheaded out of the field for challenging the ideas of a prominent professor in the department. Big mistake.
It will be in your stocking right next to a copy of Half-Life 2, Episode 3.
Also, a lot of schools still require you to live on campus and buy meal plans for your first year or two (more if you're out of state).
Fine as *one* backup location, fine for non-critical data and apps, fine for anything that won't be particularly missed if it goes offline for a while.
Shit for anything important.
They were probably glad to be rid of MOST of it.
The eternal causenik who still doesn't understand that the price of admission for using FOSS shouldn't be having to buy into his pet social movement.
You can't call it "freedom" if you only expect everyone else to just use it to agree with you and do what you want them to do.
Politically speaking, about the only way to do that would be to get the defense contractors on board (since they all but own Congress outright). Unless Congress puts Northrop Grumman in charge of building the craft, Blackwater (or whatever they're calling themselves this week) in charge of moon security, and KBR in charge of moon logistics, you can forget diverting any money from defense.