Me to work = 36.8 miles = 18.9 seconds Me to my parents' house = 545 miles = 4min 40.26 seconds Me to my girlfriend's house =....ok now I'm just making stuff up.
Obviously it's because August 26 is Macaulay Culkin's birthday. Everyone knows terrorists are big fans of the Home Alone movies, though not the third one.
Actually, an EULA is an agreement, not just a license (End User License Agreement). Simply put, it is the agreement by the user to adhere to the license. When the user agrees to adhere to the license, it becomes a contract between the parties because the agreement was accepted by both. Therefore, he is correct in stating that it is a binding contract.
So how long until wargrabbing becomes a commonplace event? I bet lots of Slashdot folks would love to get their hands on some insecure PANs (pun intended).
They don't ask you things like that. Did you read the article? He mentioned nothing of the sort.
A little further up I posted my comments about my experience with the NSA polygraph that happened a few days ago, which parallelled exactly what was said in the article. The only "control questions" they asked were personal identity things, and, of course, I answered "yes" to all of them because they were correct. "Is your birthday...?" "Is your name...?" Nothing to throw me off.
They (the NSA) really don't do this sort of thing any more, I'm not sure why people believe this. Read my comment further up and you'll see exactly what they base their tests on.
This is definitely true, however it doesn't matter. You still will be required to take one if you're looking to get cleared, and you will still have to deal with the inaccuracies of the test...
I took a polygraph 2 days ago for my security clearance to work at the NSA as a contractor (very top-level clearance, after months and months of background checks and questionnaires). I have never done anything seriously wrong, aside from shoplifting some things while a teenager and various other small-time things that really do not matter much. I've never touched illegal drugs. However, during the test, he decided that I was lying about three things:
Serious crimes I have committed Drug usage in the past 5 years Providing false information on my security forms.
He was a nice guy, though, and after his analysis, we talked about it, and it basically boiled down to the fact that the polygraph doesn't really detect if you're lying, it just detects if you have any symptoms that could be related to lying after asking a question. When he asked about serious crimes (which only apply to murders, rapes, and felony larcenies like embezzling and what not), I thought about every wrong thing I had done in the past. This triggered a response on the machine.
We talked about that, I told him everything that went through my mind, and he told me that none of those things matter now, and that I shouldn't be concerned with them when answering the questions. The same thing happened with the other questions. He then re-administered the section to me regarding these things and he said that it was "much better, but not perfect." I imagine someone with a conscience that is much less-overactive would do far better than myself.
Remember, these tests simply measure what you think might be lying, not what actually is a lie. So if you feel that the $20 you stole from your dad's wallet was so morally reprehensible that when it runs through your mind you feel that you were a criminal, then you would most likely appear to be lying about your past serious criminal offenses, even though the NSA doesn't care about it at all.
Actually, that is not true. There have been several occasions where voice actors from The Simpson's have been on Late Night with Conan O'Brien, and they have done the voices there. I remember seeing an episode with both Dan Castellaneta and Harry Shearer, where both of them did their respective voices.
You are completely correct in stating that it is not a joke. Allowing people with physical disabilities access to buildings that we all have access to is a necessity in todays society.
However, there is a difference between building accessibility, and web site accessibility. The web site for a company is merely an additional means for the company to reach people. It is not required by the company (at least this one in particular) to stay in business, only the physical, tangible quailities are (the flights, the tickets, etc.). If the company had no web site, it would still remain the same business as it currently is.
This is why this case is so outrageous. Why should something that is EXTRA to the companie's normal operations have to cater to everyone's needs? One could even argue that a family without a computer cannot access the web site, and say that this is unjust! No, this is not. The family simply cannot enjoy the EXTRA benefits that they have decided to provide in ADDITION to the company's main focus.
It's just like a pamphlet. One would not go hay-wire over the fact that a pamphlet has no braille on it. This is because it is understood there are OTHER means to get the information. The ignorance of the matter just makes it all the more frustrating.
Seriously, consider the actual necessity of the web site to using the company's services. It's not necessary at all. This is why it should not be able to be sued under the ADA.
The only problem this poses is a lack of competition by local companies. If the costs are all rolled into the association cost, then this wouldn't allow the homeowners to actually choose their cable and phone providers. Although many places already have instances where there is not much choice, there are many others where several companies are competing, and allowing the subdivision to decide this for its homeowners could be a bad thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Me to work = 36.8 miles = 18.9 seconds ....ok now I'm just making stuff up.
Me to my parents' house = 545 miles = 4min 40.26 seconds
Me to my girlfriend's house =
Also, why tomorrow?
Obviously it's because August 26 is Macaulay Culkin's birthday. Everyone knows terrorists are big fans of the Home Alone movies, though not the third one.
Actually, an EULA is an agreement, not just a license (End User License Agreement). Simply put, it is the agreement by the user to adhere to the license. When the user agrees to adhere to the license, it becomes a contract between the parties because the agreement was accepted by both. Therefore, he is correct in stating that it is a binding contract.
So how long until wargrabbing becomes a commonplace event? I bet lots of Slashdot folks would love to get their hands on some insecure PANs (pun intended).
I'll be here all night.
They don't ask you things like that. Did you read the article? He mentioned nothing of the sort.
...?" "Is your name ...?" Nothing to throw me off.
A little further up I posted my comments about my experience with the NSA polygraph that happened a few days ago, which parallelled exactly what was said in the article. The only "control questions" they asked were personal identity things, and, of course, I answered "yes" to all of them because they were correct. "Is your birthday
They (the NSA) really don't do this sort of thing any more, I'm not sure why people believe this. Read my comment further up and you'll see exactly what they base their tests on.
This is definitely true, however it doesn't matter. You still will be required to take one if you're looking to get cleared, and you will still have to deal with the inaccuracies of the test...
I took a polygraph 2 days ago for my security clearance to work at the NSA as a contractor (very top-level clearance, after months and months of background checks and questionnaires). I have never done anything seriously wrong, aside from shoplifting some things while a teenager and various other small-time things that really do not matter much. I've never touched illegal drugs. However, during the test, he decided that I was lying about three things:
Serious crimes I have committed
Drug usage in the past 5 years
Providing false information on my security forms.
He was a nice guy, though, and after his analysis, we talked about it, and it basically boiled down to the fact that the polygraph doesn't really detect if you're lying, it just detects if you have any symptoms that could be related to lying after asking a question. When he asked about serious crimes (which only apply to murders, rapes, and felony larcenies like embezzling and what not), I thought about every wrong thing I had done in the past. This triggered a response on the machine.
We talked about that, I told him everything that went through my mind, and he told me that none of those things matter now, and that I shouldn't be concerned with them when answering the questions. The same thing happened with the other questions. He then re-administered the section to me regarding these things and he said that it was "much better, but not perfect." I imagine someone with a conscience that is much less-overactive would do far better than myself.
Remember, these tests simply measure what you think might be lying, not what actually is a lie. So if you feel that the $20 you stole from your dad's wallet was so morally reprehensible that when it runs through your mind you feel that you were a criminal, then you would most likely appear to be lying about your past serious criminal offenses, even though the NSA doesn't care about it at all.
Actually, that is not true. There have been several occasions where voice actors from The Simpson's have been on Late Night with Conan O'Brien, and they have done the voices there. I remember seeing an episode with both Dan Castellaneta and Harry Shearer, where both of them did their respective voices.
You are completely correct in stating that it is not a joke. Allowing people with physical disabilities access to buildings that we all have access to is a necessity in todays society.
However, there is a difference between building accessibility, and web site accessibility. The web site for a company is merely an additional means for the company to reach people. It is not required by the company (at least this one in particular) to stay in business, only the physical, tangible quailities are (the flights, the tickets, etc.). If the company had no web site, it would still remain the same business as it currently is.
This is why this case is so outrageous. Why should something that is EXTRA to the companie's normal operations have to cater to everyone's needs? One could even argue that a family without a computer cannot access the web site, and say that this is unjust! No, this is not. The family simply cannot enjoy the EXTRA benefits that they have decided to provide in ADDITION to the company's main focus.
It's just like a pamphlet. One would not go hay-wire over the fact that a pamphlet has no braille on it. This is because it is understood there are OTHER means to get the information. The ignorance of the matter just makes it all the more frustrating.
Seriously, consider the actual necessity of the web site to using the company's services. It's not necessary at all. This is why it should not be able to be sued under the ADA.
The only problem this poses is a lack of competition by local companies. If the costs are all rolled into the association cost, then this wouldn't allow the homeowners to actually choose their cable and phone providers. Although many places already have instances where there is not much choice, there are many others where several companies are competing, and allowing the subdivision to decide this for its homeowners could be a bad thing.