Google, in providing a nationwide map and automated directions, would not be able to know the laws of each and every state, county, and city in the land. It would be an impossible task for any company.
When I was living in Knoxville, I had little choice on where I had to walk. Even on local streets, there was very little sidewalk area. In many places it's either posted no trespassing without having business with the business or just plain impractical to walk anywhere but on the shoulder.
Also, the submission is mis-leading. It first says major highway then it says busy rural highway. There is a difference between a major highway and a busy rural highway. Having lived in rural America for over 20 years, I can tell you that even the busiest rural highways don't have anyway near the traffic to make them a major highway (think at least 4 lanes with speeds up to 75 mph (major highway) vs. 2 lanes with speeds up to 55-60 mph (busy rural highway)).
No rural highway I've ever come across has sidewalks, and often times it's the only way to a destination. And if you won't walk 3km to your destination because it might get you hit, you're just being lazy. I walked 6 miles a day, 5-6 days a week, rain or shine just to be able to work. I had to cross major thoroughfares (4 to 8 lane streets, cross in front of access ramps to interstate, etc.) and keep an eye or ear on traffic coming both ways. In 2 years I wasn't even knicked once. Why? Because I was paying attention.
After reading the article (both of them) and seeing one of the areas along the route, I probably would not have followed the directions to a T (staying on the side where I have ample opportunity to jump into the bushes if need be), but I still see nothing wrong with the directions itself. She should have used common sense in following them. Since she didn't, it's her OWN lack of judgment that caused her to be hit, not Google's.
That sounds a lot more complicated as you'd need to hack at least one high traffic website, read the cookies stored by the browser, and then force a meta-refresh only when the user isn't looking.
I consider myself fairly intelligent but I'm trying to figure out what you are trying to say.
At one point you are saying this guy is the one for the job.
But then you seem to be saying there shouldn't be that job.
And then you go off on some (seemingly, though not necessarily) unrelated tangent.
My concern is about government guidelines regarding cyber-warfare, not our ability to wage it effectively, to protect our privacy and liberties. Only your last three or four sentences really directly pertain to what I stated. The government in defining new guidelines needs to move slow because the ramifications (which will be far reaching) of any decision needs to be carefully weighed. This slamming through of bills (in all areas really) is distressing and disturbing because, especially in this regard, the law of unintended consequences will rear it's ugly head and not be put down.
If the Federal Government doesn't move fast, our capabilities and what we do will set the precedents that shape future laws instead of vice-versa, but at the same time snap-judgments that turn out to be wrong will be even worse. That's why I said there is no right answer to the question of "Should the government move fast or slow in regards to guidelines about the use of cyber-warfare?"
Fine, private industry does not want the government to be over cyber attack for the.com and.org's of the world. I can live with that. I don't actually care about that (I think it's too broad, far reaching, and resource intensive to ever be manageable anyway). If I want to protect my resources against cyber-attack, I will engage in some form of barter with another entity to gain such protections for myself. Let the government take care of its own domains (.gov and.mil as you mentioned) and everyone else take care of theirs.
I had to strip someone of their geek cred the other day (they had never seen the Original Trilogy nor knew what it was when I referenced it (and you lose points if you don't get that without more help)).
Right now, it doesn't matter. He apparently knows how to use people who know more than he does. To me he proved that when he took out the honeytrap site (stupid move, but whatever).
From TFA:
The difficulties facing the new command were underlined in March by former CIA director Michael V Hayden, who said that the Saudi operation had demonstrated that cyber warfare techniques were evolving so rapidly that they were now outpacing the government's ability to develop coherent policies to guide its use.
"Cyber was moving so fast that we were always in danger of building up precedent before we built up policy," Hayden said.
This is the key point. Unfortunately the Federal government is SUPPOSED to move slow. The unfortunate part of that is something like cyberwarfare will always outstrip even the ability of a state government (with the assumption being that state government is meant to move quicker to respond directly to the needs of it's people) to make policy governing its use.
Soooooo....*shrugs*
I'm kind of torn on this. Let the government grind slowly away at policy like it should, or enable them to make snap, on-the-fly decisions with far-reaching ramifications. No matter what you choose, it's the wrong answer.
In that series of events, I would have to question if it indeed was an accident and also the wisdom of putting oil risers so close to a car accessible area.
I find it amazing they've created a spaceship that can stay up in the sky for up to 9 months at a time.
How's that? There are no humans to feed or otherwise keep comfortable and alive. Small craft, electronics for spying, stable orbit. Sounds like it could stay up longer if needed.
true, but I generally get a healthy serving of new foods just to overcome that initial first reaction. This way I can have several reactions in one sitting.
Slashdot Mirror
Google, in providing a nationwide map and automated directions, would not be able to know the laws of each and every state, county, and city in the land. It would be an impossible task for any company.
When I was living in Knoxville, I had little choice on where I had to walk. Even on local streets, there was very little sidewalk area. In many places it's either posted no trespassing without having business with the business or just plain impractical to walk anywhere but on the shoulder.
Also, the submission is mis-leading. It first says major highway then it says busy rural highway. There is a difference between a major highway and a busy rural highway. Having lived in rural America for over 20 years, I can tell you that even the busiest rural highways don't have anyway near the traffic to make them a major highway (think at least 4 lanes with speeds up to 75 mph (major highway) vs. 2 lanes with speeds up to 55-60 mph (busy rural highway)).
No rural highway I've ever come across has sidewalks, and often times it's the only way to a destination. And if you won't walk 3km to your destination because it might get you hit, you're just being lazy. I walked 6 miles a day, 5-6 days a week, rain or shine just to be able to work. I had to cross major thoroughfares (4 to 8 lane streets, cross in front of access ramps to interstate, etc.) and keep an eye or ear on traffic coming both ways. In 2 years I wasn't even knicked once. Why? Because I was paying attention.
After reading the article (both of them) and seeing one of the areas along the route, I probably would not have followed the directions to a T (staying on the side where I have ample opportunity to jump into the bushes if need be), but I still see nothing wrong with the directions itself. She should have used common sense in following them. Since she didn't, it's her OWN lack of judgment that caused her to be hit, not Google's.
No personal responsibility at all involved here? I can see how the driver is liable, but Google? Psht.
I'm not disappointed. I want to see Flash die a horrible, flaming death.
Actually I think the screen qualifies as a flimsy. :p
Ebola
It does only single computer, but if you put a machine in front of your router, bam. Meter the whole network.
I didn't know that it only picks up what iptables doesn't filter. That could be an issue but I'm sure there is a way around that.
Yep, and is available for FreeBSD via ports.
I know. *plays world's smallest violin*
grkellm comes with a bandwidth meter.
There goes our military.
Government by employed, thieving, body-snatchers.
Amen!
*grin*
Still, you're going to be targeting a group of people who regularly use tabs.
Though this sounds as if it would work if anything took the focus from the window and not just the tab. Am I incorrect about this?
probably, but the submission gave me enough info to talk about the subject.
Without having RTFA:
That sounds a lot more complicated as you'd need to hack at least one high traffic website, read the cookies stored by the browser, and then force a meta-refresh only when the user isn't looking.
Notice that I only used words like "many/most"
Too true (and it would be enacted, not inacted)
Alright, I should have been more specific. I meant Star Wars (Ep. IV-VI)
I consider myself fairly intelligent but I'm trying to figure out what you are trying to say.
At one point you are saying this guy is the one for the job.
But then you seem to be saying there shouldn't be that job.
And then you go off on some (seemingly, though not necessarily) unrelated tangent.
My concern is about government guidelines regarding cyber-warfare, not our ability to wage it effectively, to protect our privacy and liberties. Only your last three or four sentences really directly pertain to what I stated. The government in defining new guidelines needs to move slow because the ramifications (which will be far reaching) of any decision needs to be carefully weighed. This slamming through of bills (in all areas really) is distressing and disturbing because, especially in this regard, the law of unintended consequences will rear it's ugly head and not be put down.
If the Federal Government doesn't move fast, our capabilities and what we do will set the precedents that shape future laws instead of vice-versa, but at the same time snap-judgments that turn out to be wrong will be even worse. That's why I said there is no right answer to the question of "Should the government move fast or slow in regards to guidelines about the use of cyber-warfare?"
Fine, private industry does not want the government to be over cyber attack for the .com and .org's of the world. I can live with that. I don't actually care about that (I think it's too broad, far reaching, and resource intensive to ever be manageable anyway). If I want to protect my resources against cyber-attack, I will engage in some form of barter with another entity to gain such protections for myself. Let the government take care of its own domains (.gov and .mil as you mentioned) and everyone else take care of theirs.
I had to strip someone of their geek cred the other day (they had never seen the Original Trilogy nor knew what it was when I referenced it (and you lose points if you don't get that without more help)).
Right now, it doesn't matter. He apparently knows how to use people who know more than he does. To me he proved that when he took out the honeytrap site (stupid move, but whatever).
From TFA:
This is the key point. Unfortunately the Federal government is SUPPOSED to move slow. The unfortunate part of that is something like cyberwarfare will always outstrip even the ability of a state government (with the assumption being that state government is meant to move quicker to respond directly to the needs of it's people) to make policy governing its use.
Soooooo....*shrugs*
I'm kind of torn on this. Let the government grind slowly away at policy like it should, or enable them to make snap, on-the-fly decisions with far-reaching ramifications. No matter what you choose, it's the wrong answer.
In that series of events, I would have to question if it indeed was an accident and also the wisdom of putting oil risers so close to a car accessible area.
I find it amazing they've created a spaceship that can stay up in the sky for up to 9 months at a time.
How's that? There are no humans to feed or otherwise keep comfortable and alive. Small craft, electronics for spying, stable orbit. Sounds like it could stay up longer if needed.
true, but I generally get a healthy serving of new foods just to overcome that initial first reaction. This way I can have several reactions in one sitting.
No, it's
WHOOSH! splash! :p