A long time ago when I was in the military, I found out about a little tidbit of information. You see, sometimes congressmen go on "official trips" and they are reimbursed in full for all expenses they incur related to that trip. And sometimes, said congressmen are accompanied by members of the military. Well, the military members were not reimbursed for all their expenses and had to pay out of pocket for some items. Well, the congressmen saw the military members spending money above and beyond what they would have if they weren't on the trip and thought that was unfair. So a new law was passed. And now the military members are reimbursed in full... provided they're on a TDY escorting congressmen.....Mind, the members of the military go on many TDY assignments and escorting congressmen is just one of them. But only TDY assignments for escorting congressmen are reimbursed in full.
And that question seems to have the context of "It's OK to spy on the general public. But it's not OK to spy on congressmen".Somewhat like the many laws we have on the books that specifically exclude congressmen.
Oh, the AC you're responding to knows all about the advertising model. And he or she is completely correct. If you're getting something for free, you're not the customer. In fact, you're most likely the product. And in the case of the advertising model, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT. The advertisers are the customer. The content is merely bait to attract product. Now what's the product? Simple. Ears and eyeballs. Or to be more specific, exposure to ears and eyeballs. Your ears and eyeballs being exposed to the advertisers. So do you now understand what "you're not the customer"?
I really hope that Ford over designs that truck since unlike steel, aluminum has no fatigue limit. And for those of you who don't know what a fatigue limit is, with some metals, they bend under stress and when the stress is removed, return to their original shape. And if the amount of bending is under their fatigue limit, then that bending process can happen an infinite number of times and no harm is done. However, if the stress is over the fatigue limit, then eventually, the metal will crack and fail. Steel has a fatigue limit, aluminum does not.
So both materials have their advantages and disadvantages. Steel. It corrodes fairly easily, but has a good fatigue limit. So if you keep it from rusting, it will pretty much last forever. Aluminum, doesn't corrode, but doesn't have a fatigue limit. So eventually, it's going to fail. No matter what you do, it will eventually fail. But the length of time until it fails can be extended by minimizing flex by using more material than what is strictly needed to handle the load. Or if you don't use excess material, inspect it frequently for fatigue cracks, and if any are found, repair them. On aircraft, they do have a strict inspection schedule and frankly, a lot of the inspection process involves crack finding via dye penetrant and X-ray. Somehow, I don't think such an inspection process would be done with a Ford F150. And I worry that Ford just might not bother to overbuild that truck since doing so will make it more expensive and heavier. I instead suspect that they would design it to last maybe 5 years or so under "typical use" until the frame starts to crack. A "reasonable" service life and guaranteed obsolescence.
Unfortunately, it wouldn't work. In order to get what you want, you'd need to find a phase change material with a melting point of about 35 degrees F. And even then, it's unlikely to work since the beverage you'd be pouring into the mug would be already very close to 35F and as such, there wouldn't be much or any energy transfer between the beverage and the phase change material. But if you did get such a mug, you could store it in the freezer. Then the phase change material would freeze and when you used the mug, it would keep your beverage close to 35F until all of the material melted.
Sorry, but a melting point of 30C is entirely too low. That's about 85F and that is the temperature that the cup of coffee would be soon brought down to until all of the gallium melted. The 140F ( 60C) temperature mentioned points towards paraffin wax which is commonly used as a phase change material for maintaining temperatures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraffin_wax#Properties
Sorry, but it's EXACTLY the same approach. As others have mentioned, this mug works like coffee joulies does. And interestingly enough, the paraffin wax that coffee joulies uses melts at 140 degrees Fahrenheit. I would be extremely surprised if Logan Maxwell wasn't also using paraffin. It's cheap, readily available, and non-toxic. The only thing different is the extra layer of insulation around the cup.
1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. 4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
OK. You're right. It's not half. It's merely 40%. Still quite significant. Now take a look at this little list.....
1. Strive to act with compassion and reciprocity toward all creatures in accordance with reason. 2. The struggle for justice is an ongoing pursuit. 3. People are fallible, and although we should all try to do our best, poor judgment is inevitable. If we make a mistake, we should do our best to rectify it, and resolve any harm that may have been caused by our misdeeds. 4. One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone. 5. Beliefs should conform to our best scientific understanding of the world. We should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit our beliefs. 6. The freedoms of others should be respected, even the freedom to offend. To willfully encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forego your own. 7. There are, and will continue to be, things unknown and misunderstood. We must recognize this, never taking pride in ignorance, never assuming the unknown to be forever unknowable. 8. While proselytizing might have noble intent, it is not acceptable to coerce or push your beliefs on others. It is always best to lead by example. 9. Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion and wisdom should always prevail over the written or spoken word.
Quite a bit of contrast there between two lists of beliefs. One of them puts a lot of emphasis on don't you dare worship any other being other than myself, and while you're at it, don't disrespect me either and by the way, here's a few other guidelines to follow. While the other list pretty much says "Do good. We don't know everything, but overall, do the best that you can." Frankly, if you didn't know where the list of 9 came from, I seriously doubt you would find anyone who would object to it. And in case you haven't yet realized where that little list of 9 came from, you just might want to check the links in the original article. Frankly, the best contrasting monument the satanists could put up would be that list of 9 tenants.....
The officer could have given him a Notice to Appear. That would require him to go to court and deal with the matter. However, a NTA is not an arrest and as such doesn't result in an entry in the NCIC database. It would have remained a local matter and dealt with locally without frankly screwing up the gentleman's life. The office quite frankly did the worst possible thing he could do for a $0.05 offense. And before you claim that the officer wasn't aware of the magnitude of the offense, that... creature... spent 10 days to verify his charges. You think he couldn't figure out that the maximum draw was on the order of a kilowatt? The officer basically spent a hell of a lot more than $0.05 of government money in order to screw over that person for life. And the timing on the arrest? Well, that's just icing on the cake.
Oh, I agree that the police officer waited and had sufficient evidence that a crime was committed. However, by his arresting the person instead of simply giving a ticket, that gentleman is now entered into the NCIC database. One major problem with that database. It's not just used by the government. It's used also for background checks to see if someone has been arrested. Doesn't matter how the case is resolved in the courts. The mere existence of that little record in NCIC is going to haunt that gentleman for the rest of his life. In fact, that little datum will in many cases prevent various corporations from ever hiring him if he ever desires to take employment with them. Frankly,that officer showed extreme lack of judgement and at the very least ought to be reprimanded.
Kinda silly to think that the reason for sillcock valves are to "prevent thieft". Their purpose is to place the actual valve inside the house where it's warm so you don't have a burst pipe due to freezing in the winter.
I don't believe that SSL infringes at all. However, RC4 is frequently used as a PRNG (after all, one of it's biggest advantages is to be used as a stream of 'random' numbers to be exclusive ored with the clear text to create the cyphertext which in turn can be xored with an identical stream of bytes at the other end to decrypt. This allows encryption to byte boundaries and doesn't require blocks of 8 bytes to be sent per transmission.) Perhaps that secondary use of RC4 along with the time honored practice of "baffle with bullshit" that's all too commonly used in the legal system managed to delude the jury into making the judgement they did.
I have no idea how in the world anyone with a clue can claim that this patent and SSL using RC4 have anything to do with each other. I just took at look at the linked patent and in a nutshell, what it does is have both parties switch encryption keys multiple times during a transmission by having both parties have identically configured pseudo random number generators which supply the encryption keys (this means that a limited amount of the transmission is encrypted with the same key before the key gets changed). Effectively this simply transfers the overall security of the system to the security of the PRNG, but it doesn't solve the problem of the initial key transfer/generation. I really hope that Newegg appeals this stupid ruling.
Frankly, the existence of such laws even if it's impossible to convict on them is scary given the existence of NCIC (National Crime Information Center). Whenever a police officer arrests someone, a record of that arrest is sent to NCIC. Then even if the person arrested is subsequently found innocent or even if the case is expunged by the court, that arrest record remains in NCIC. And to finally top things off, that NCIC database is used by companies to perform background checks of possible and current employees. And many of those companies will not hire anyone who has an arrest record... even if the person had been found innocent, or if the case was expunged. After all, that tidbit of information isn't stored in NCIC. Merely the arrest record.
So if a police officer wishes to totally screw up someone for life, all they need do is simply arrest the person. For any charge whatsoever. And then let NCIC take care of the rest.
Seems to me that the creator of that site is shortsighted in how he or she confirms who the assassin is. Namely, that the assassin has to be able to specify the date of death prior to the death. That task if fairly easy for a large number of ways of committing murder. But not always possible. For instance.
1. Poison 2. Opportunity - Assassin may be in a position where he or she has multiple chances of contact with the target, but is unable to predict exactly when the contact would be suitable for the actual assassination.
Frankly, the motive of the site creator is rather foolish and childish. Given this paragraph in the original article:
Sanjuro's grisly ambitions go beyond raising the funds to bankroll a few political killings. He believes that if Assassination Market can persist and gain enough users, it will eventually enable the assassinations of enough politicians that no one would dare to hold office. He says he intends Assassination Market to destroy "all governments, everywhere."
it seems to me that Sanjuro is advocating world wide anarchy.
I personally, don't like most governments, however total anarchy is worse than the government we currently have. Frankly, we need something to hold in check the various sociopathic assholes that from time to time attack other people. We need public services such as fire, police, sanitation, sewers, water, etc. There's a lot of infrastructure that frankly needs a government. And even well balanced, social people from time to time will disagree with each other. And said disagreements will from time to time get quite acrimonious. Hence the courts.
Frankly, Sanjuro is either a nutcase, or a honeypot. In either case, it would be best to avoid him.
Hmm... Seems to me that there may not be an venue for overruling the FISA request. However, an "unrelated" case may be made that the NSA obtained meta information illegally. So bring the NSA up on charges about that illegally obtained information. And then when they introduce the FISA request as a defense, then you have grounds to go on that. Mind, I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like a reasonable approach and I'm certain that a lawyer could come up with something like that. So don't bother with targeting the FISA. Target the actual activities. Then work your way up from there.
I think they're looking for combinations of words, not individual words. For instance, the search 'child care' is quite innocent. whereas 'child care after anal penetration' isn't innocent.
The BBC article linked describes PM Cameron's demand as,
He said they needed to ensure that searches which were unambiguously aimed at finding illegal images should return no results.
Mind, the above request is rather... difficult... to perform. It assumes natural language understand and it quite likely that any system short of a full up AI isn't going to be able to fulfill that request 100% of the time with no false positives or negatives. But a 90% solution ought to be possible. The unfortunate aspect is where the errors are going to be. Are they going to be false negatives where illegal material becomes searchable? Or false positives where people seeking help happen to have their searches rejected? Given the current legal environment, I strongly suspect that the balance will tilt strongly in the direction of false positives.
I have got to laugh at this level of ignorance. You just might want to review what happened during that time frame.
1. Election happened. 2. Democrats cried 'foul', there must be a recount. 3. Much legal wrangling and counting went on. A nice summary was
Republicans - This has to go to the Supreme Court.
Democrats - Nope, it's too early for the Supreme Count. We can handle it at a lower level. 4. Repeat step 3 until time is almost out. 5. The case finally gets to the Supreme Court. 6. Verdict boiled down to 'A new vote should have been done, however, there is no longer enough time for it so the current count stands'
Hmm... Seems to me that the Democrats shot themselves in the foot there during step 3. But then again, the policy that they had on recounts in generals for close elections was a. Perform recount. b. If recount not in their favor, go to step a. c. If recount in their favor, no matter how small the margin is, then scream 'Stop! The recount is done! We won!'.
But in the case of Florida, their usual tactics failed. Too bad, so sad.
Hmm... Seems to me that if google and bing have enough content indexed so as to be able to identify content as matching those 100,000 prohibited searches, then they ought to be able to automatically notify authorities about those web sites holding said prohibited content. Who can then take the appropriate legal actions. Which would target those who are making such content available, not the mere sick individuals seeking such content.
Indeed. And in fact, most people are using a technology right now that if it were to be introduced for the first time in today's safety climate would be rejected due to bad design and safety issues. That technology being the common light bulb socket. Think about it. Bare metal contacts that can be easily touched. If the bulb breaks, removal of the base being a hazardous activity (even more so if the power is left on). And in fact, the polarized two prong plugs and outlets you now find were developed as a means of attempting to render the light socket safer (when properly wired, the polarized plugs and sockets will arrange for the screw to be at ground instead of being 'hot'.)
Considering that you can go purchase a large bottle of Tylenol at the neighborhood drug store, I'd say that suicide is already easy. Mind, using Tylenol is one of the more painful ways to die (liver failure isn't fun), but it is quite easy. And there's plenty of other means of committing suicide to anyone who wishes to do so.
Please read and understand the article... The entire intent is to prevent a bot from being able to use a stolen list of passwords. Method of use
1. Setup authentication credentials. This includes your userid&password as well as naming a series of random inkblot designs. All this is stored for future authencation. 2. When you log onto the system, you supply the userid&password, and match up the descriptions and inkblots you saw in step 1 above.
if your passwords and such are stolen, then the criminal needs to be able to do step #2. However, the likelihood of a bot being able to match your descriptions with the inkblots is slim to none.
The intent of the system isn't to prevent a bot from being able to create an account. It's to prevent a bot from being able to utilize stolen user credentials.
Impressive. But stupid. Yes, the autobahn has unlimited speed, but they also require that the vehicle be in serviceable condition. Given the warning indicator for the tire pressure system, I kinda wonder if the tires were properly inflated and in good condition. But at least the test wasn't for long.
The answer to that question is quite simple. Some years back, I had to take a polygraph and frankly, it felt as if a "game" was being played where I didn't know the rules. There were some issues with my test so they rescheduled me for a followup. Since I didn't like the feeling that there was a game being played, I spent the time before the follow up researching polygraphy. Turns out that there's a lot of information on the subject and I also found out that there was a classified government study on the effectiveness of polygraphs. I didn't see the contents of that study, but [i]if[/i] that study reflected the information available in the public literature and [i]if[/i] I were to be a classification authority, I too would have classified the study. The reason is because the public literature boils down to the following.
Polygraphy as a tool for distinguishing truth from lies is totally worthless. However, as a tool for eliciting voluntary confessions from naive subjects, it's quite effective.
So as long as it's kept mysterious and secret, it's quite useful. But once the pool of naive subjects is gone (and they would be gone if the reality of polygraphy were widespread), then that tool becomes worthless.
Slashdot Mirror
A long time ago when I was in the military, I found out about a little tidbit of information. You see, sometimes congressmen go on "official trips" and they are reimbursed in full for all expenses they incur related to that trip. And sometimes, said congressmen are accompanied by members of the military. Well, the military members were not reimbursed for all their expenses and had to pay out of pocket for some items. Well, the congressmen saw the military members spending money above and beyond what they would have if they weren't on the trip and thought that was unfair. So a new law was passed. And now the military members are reimbursed in full ... provided they're on a TDY escorting congressmen.....Mind, the members of the military go on many TDY assignments and escorting congressmen is just one of them. But only TDY assignments for escorting congressmen are reimbursed in full.
And that question seems to have the context of "It's OK to spy on the general public. But it's not OK to spy on congressmen".Somewhat like the many laws we have on the books that specifically exclude congressmen.
Oh, the AC you're responding to knows all about the advertising model. And he or she is completely correct. If you're getting something for free, you're not the customer. In fact, you're most likely the product. And in the case of the advertising model, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT. The advertisers are the customer. The content is merely bait to attract product. Now what's the product? Simple. Ears and eyeballs. Or to be more specific, exposure to ears and eyeballs. Your ears and eyeballs being exposed to the advertisers. So do you now understand what "you're not the customer"?
Interesting, there seems to be plenty of CCTV footage on youtube. Did everyone in this compilation get fired? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGSFQxxJaZk
I really hope that Ford over designs that truck since unlike steel, aluminum has no fatigue limit. And for those of you who don't know what a fatigue limit is, with some metals, they bend under stress and when the stress is removed, return to their original shape. And if the amount of bending is under their fatigue limit, then that bending process can happen an infinite number of times and no harm is done. However, if the stress is over the fatigue limit, then eventually, the metal will crack and fail. Steel has a fatigue limit, aluminum does not.
So both materials have their advantages and disadvantages.
Steel. It corrodes fairly easily, but has a good fatigue limit. So if you keep it from rusting, it will pretty much last forever.
Aluminum, doesn't corrode, but doesn't have a fatigue limit. So eventually, it's going to fail. No matter what you do, it will eventually fail. But the length of time until it fails can be extended by minimizing flex by using more material than what is strictly needed to handle the load. Or if you don't use excess material, inspect it frequently for fatigue cracks, and if any are found, repair them. On aircraft, they do have a strict inspection schedule and frankly, a lot of the inspection process involves crack finding via dye penetrant and X-ray. Somehow, I don't think such an inspection process would be done with a Ford F150. And I worry that Ford just might not bother to overbuild that truck since doing so will make it more expensive and heavier. I instead suspect that they would design it to last maybe 5 years or so under "typical use" until the frame starts to crack. A "reasonable" service life and guaranteed obsolescence.
Unfortunately, it wouldn't work. In order to get what you want, you'd need to find a phase change material with a melting point of about 35 degrees F. And even then, it's unlikely to work since the beverage you'd be pouring into the mug would be already very close to 35F and as such, there wouldn't be much or any energy transfer between the beverage and the phase change material. But if you did get such a mug, you could store it in the freezer. Then the phase change material would freeze and when you used the mug, it would keep your beverage close to 35F until all of the material melted.
Sorry, but a melting point of 30C is entirely too low. That's about 85F and that is the temperature that the cup of coffee would be soon brought down to until all of the gallium melted. The 140F ( 60C) temperature mentioned points towards paraffin wax which is commonly used as a phase change material for maintaining temperatures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraffin_wax#Properties
Sorry, but it's EXACTLY the same approach. As others have mentioned, this mug works like coffee joulies does. And interestingly enough, the paraffin wax that coffee joulies uses melts at 140 degrees Fahrenheit. I would be extremely surprised if Logan Maxwell wasn't also using paraffin. It's cheap, readily available, and non-toxic. The only thing different is the extra layer of insulation around the cup.
Shall we take a look at this?
1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
OK. You're right. It's not half. It's merely 40%. Still quite significant. Now take a look at this little list.....
1. Strive to act with compassion and reciprocity toward all creatures in accordance with reason.
2. The struggle for justice is an ongoing pursuit.
3. People are fallible, and although we should all try to do our best, poor judgment is inevitable. If we make a mistake, we should do our best to rectify it, and resolve any harm that may have been caused by our misdeeds.
4. One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.
5. Beliefs should conform to our best scientific understanding of the world. We should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit our beliefs.
6. The freedoms of others should be respected, even the freedom to offend. To willfully encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forego your own.
7. There are, and will continue to be, things unknown and misunderstood. We must recognize this, never taking pride in ignorance, never assuming the unknown to be forever unknowable.
8. While proselytizing might have noble intent, it is not acceptable to coerce or push your beliefs on others. It is always best to lead by example.
9. Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion and wisdom should always prevail over the written or spoken word.
Quite a bit of contrast there between two lists of beliefs. One of them puts a lot of emphasis on don't you dare worship any other being other than myself, and while you're at it, don't disrespect me either and by the way, here's a few other guidelines to follow. While the other list pretty much says "Do good. We don't know everything, but overall, do the best that you can." Frankly, if you didn't know where the list of 9 came from, I seriously doubt you would find anyone who would object to it. And in case you haven't yet realized where that little list of 9 came from, you just might want to check the links in the original article. Frankly, the best contrasting monument the satanists could put up would be that list of 9 tenants.....
The officer could have given him a Notice to Appear. That would require him to go to court and deal with the matter. However, a NTA is not an arrest and as such doesn't result in an entry in the NCIC database. It would have remained a local matter and dealt with locally without frankly screwing up the gentleman's life. The office quite frankly did the worst possible thing he could do for a $0.05 offense. And before you claim that the officer wasn't aware of the magnitude of the offense, that ... creature ... spent 10 days to verify his charges. You think he couldn't figure out that the maximum draw was on the order of a kilowatt? The officer basically spent a hell of a lot more than $0.05 of government money in order to screw over that person for life. And the timing on the arrest? Well, that's just icing on the cake.
Oh, I agree that the police officer waited and had sufficient evidence that a crime was committed. However, by his arresting the person instead of simply giving a ticket, that gentleman is now entered into the NCIC database. One major problem with that database. It's not just used by the government. It's used also for background checks to see if someone has been arrested. Doesn't matter how the case is resolved in the courts. The mere existence of that little record in NCIC is going to haunt that gentleman for the rest of his life. In fact, that little datum will in many cases prevent various corporations from ever hiring him if he ever desires to take employment with them. Frankly,that officer showed extreme lack of judgement and at the very least ought to be reprimanded.
Kinda silly to think that the reason for sillcock valves are to "prevent thieft". Their purpose is to place the actual valve inside the house where it's warm so you don't have a burst pipe due to freezing in the winter.
I believe the term you're looking for is 'White Mutiny'
I don't believe that SSL infringes at all. However, RC4 is frequently used as a PRNG (after all, one of it's biggest advantages is to be used as a stream of 'random' numbers to be exclusive ored with the clear text to create the cyphertext which in turn can be xored with an identical stream of bytes at the other end to decrypt. This allows encryption to byte boundaries and doesn't require blocks of 8 bytes to be sent per transmission.) Perhaps that secondary use of RC4 along with the time honored practice of "baffle with bullshit" that's all too commonly used in the legal system managed to delude the jury into making the judgement they did.
I have no idea how in the world anyone with a clue can claim that this patent and SSL using RC4 have anything to do with each other. I just took at look at the linked patent and in a nutshell, what it does is have both parties switch encryption keys multiple times during a transmission by having both parties have identically configured pseudo random number generators which supply the encryption keys (this means that a limited amount of the transmission is encrypted with the same key before the key gets changed). Effectively this simply transfers the overall security of the system to the security of the PRNG, but it doesn't solve the problem of the initial key transfer/generation. I really hope that Newegg appeals this stupid ruling.
Frankly, the existence of such laws even if it's impossible to convict on them is scary given the existence of NCIC (National Crime Information Center). Whenever a police officer arrests someone, a record of that arrest is sent to NCIC. Then even if the person arrested is subsequently found innocent or even if the case is expunged by the court, that arrest record remains in NCIC. And to finally top things off, that NCIC database is used by companies to perform background checks of possible and current employees. And many of those companies will not hire anyone who has an arrest record ... even if the person had been found innocent, or if the case was expunged. After all, that tidbit of information isn't stored in NCIC. Merely the arrest record.
So if a police officer wishes to totally screw up someone for life, all they need do is simply arrest the person. For any charge whatsoever. And then let NCIC take care of the rest.
Be afraid, be very very afraid.
Seems to me that the creator of that site is shortsighted in how he or she confirms who the assassin is. Namely, that the assassin has to be able to specify the date of death prior to the death. That task if fairly easy for a large number of ways of committing murder. But not always possible. For instance.
1. Poison
2. Opportunity - Assassin may be in a position where he or she has multiple chances of contact with the target, but is unable to predict exactly when the contact would be suitable for the actual assassination.
Frankly, the motive of the site creator is rather foolish and childish. Given this paragraph in the original article:
Sanjuro's grisly ambitions go beyond raising the funds to bankroll a few political killings. He believes that if Assassination Market can persist and gain enough users, it will eventually enable the assassinations of enough politicians that no one would dare to hold office. He says he intends Assassination Market to destroy "all governments, everywhere."
it seems to me that Sanjuro is advocating world wide anarchy.
I personally, don't like most governments, however total anarchy is worse than the government we currently have. Frankly, we need something to hold in check the various sociopathic assholes that from time to time attack other people. We need public services such as fire, police, sanitation, sewers, water, etc. There's a lot of infrastructure that frankly needs a government. And even well balanced, social people from time to time will disagree with each other. And said disagreements will from time to time get quite acrimonious. Hence the courts.
Frankly, Sanjuro is either a nutcase, or a honeypot. In either case, it would be best to avoid him.
Hmm... Seems to me that there may not be an venue for overruling the FISA request. However, an "unrelated" case may be made that the NSA obtained meta information illegally. So bring the NSA up on charges about that illegally obtained information. And then when they introduce the FISA request as a defense, then you have grounds to go on that. Mind, I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like a reasonable approach and I'm certain that a lawyer could come up with something like that. So don't bother with targeting the FISA. Target the actual activities. Then work your way up from there.
I think they're looking for combinations of words, not individual words. For instance, the search
'child care' is quite innocent.
whereas
'child care after anal penetration' isn't innocent.
The BBC article linked describes PM Cameron's demand as,
He said they needed to ensure that searches which were unambiguously aimed at finding illegal images should return no results.
Mind, the above request is rather ... difficult ... to perform. It assumes natural language understand and it quite likely that any system short of a full up AI isn't going to be able to fulfill that request 100% of the time with no false positives or negatives. But a 90% solution ought to be possible. The unfortunate aspect is where the errors are going to be. Are they going to be false negatives where illegal material becomes searchable? Or false positives where people seeking help happen to have their searches rejected? Given the current legal environment, I strongly suspect that the balance will tilt strongly in the direction of false positives.
I have got to laugh at this level of ignorance. You just might want to review what happened during that time frame.
1. Election happened.
2. Democrats cried 'foul', there must be a recount.
3. Much legal wrangling and counting went on. A nice summary was
Republicans - This has to go to the Supreme Court.
Democrats - Nope, it's too early for the Supreme Count. We can handle it at a lower level.
4. Repeat step 3 until time is almost out.
5. The case finally gets to the Supreme Court.
6. Verdict boiled down to 'A new vote should have been done, however, there is no longer enough time for it so the current count stands'
Hmm... Seems to me that the Democrats shot themselves in the foot there during step 3. But then again, the policy that they had on recounts in generals for close elections was
a. Perform recount.
b. If recount not in their favor, go to step a.
c. If recount in their favor, no matter how small the margin is, then scream 'Stop! The recount is done! We won!'.
But in the case of Florida, their usual tactics failed. Too bad, so sad.
Hmm... Seems to me that if google and bing have enough content indexed so as to be able to identify content as matching those 100,000 prohibited searches, then they ought to be able to automatically notify authorities about those web sites holding said prohibited content. Who can then take the appropriate legal actions. Which would target those who are making such content available, not the mere sick individuals seeking such content.
I've got to wonder why such wasn't mentioned.
Indeed. And in fact, most people are using a technology right now that if it were to be introduced for the first time in today's safety climate would be rejected due to bad design and safety issues. That technology being the common light bulb socket. Think about it. Bare metal contacts that can be easily touched. If the bulb breaks, removal of the base being a hazardous activity (even more so if the power is left on). And in fact, the polarized two prong plugs and outlets you now find were developed as a means of attempting to render the light socket safer (when properly wired, the polarized plugs and sockets will arrange for the screw to be at ground instead of being 'hot'.)
Considering that you can go purchase a large bottle of Tylenol at the neighborhood drug store, I'd say that suicide is already easy. Mind, using Tylenol is one of the more painful ways to die (liver failure isn't fun), but it is quite easy. And there's plenty of other means of committing suicide to anyone who wishes to do so.
Please read and understand the article...
The entire intent is to prevent a bot from being able to use a stolen list of passwords. Method of use
1. Setup authentication credentials. This includes your userid&password as well as naming a series of random inkblot designs. All this is stored for future authencation.
2. When you log onto the system, you supply the userid&password, and match up the descriptions and inkblots you saw in step 1 above.
if your passwords and such are stolen, then the criminal needs to be able to do step #2. However, the likelihood of a bot being able to match your descriptions with the inkblots is slim to none.
The intent of the system isn't to prevent a bot from being able to create an account. It's to prevent a bot from being able to utilize stolen user credentials.
Impressive. But stupid. Yes, the autobahn has unlimited speed, but they also require that the vehicle be in serviceable condition. Given the warning indicator for the tire pressure system, I kinda wonder if the tires were properly inflated and in good condition. But at least the test wasn't for long.
The answer to that question is quite simple. Some years back, I had to take a polygraph and frankly, it felt as if a "game" was being played where I didn't know the rules. There were some issues with my test so they rescheduled me for a followup. Since I didn't like the feeling that there was a game being played, I spent the time before the follow up researching polygraphy. Turns out that there's a lot of information on the subject and I also found out that there was a classified government study on the effectiveness of polygraphs. I didn't see the contents of that study, but [i]if[/i] that study reflected the information available in the public literature and [i]if[/i] I were to be a classification authority, I too would have classified the study. The reason is because the public literature boils down to the following.
Polygraphy as a tool for distinguishing truth from lies is totally worthless. However, as a tool for eliciting voluntary confessions from naive subjects, it's quite effective.
So as long as it's kept mysterious and secret, it's quite useful. But once the pool of naive subjects is gone (and they would be gone if the reality of polygraphy were widespread), then that tool becomes worthless.