There is a lot of misunderstanding around no-fault insurance. If you look at insurance as a tax that adds no value, you probably hate the no-fault provisions. On the other hand, if you want to protect yourself and your family, the no-fault model works a lot better. If I have a no-fault personal-injury protection policy for $1 million, I'm guaranteed that my medical bills get covered if I'm in a wreck. OTOH if no-fault insurance isn't an option, the person who runs into me may have only the state minimum required liability insurance (like $30k or something). This isn't a risk that I can take. So I'd have to buy a policy for $0.997 million dollars to cover the deficiency. The price of the two are probably about the same. The "no fault" provisions don't apply to property damage. Of course maybe the person had no insurance at all, so now I'm really back to buying the full policy. If an indigent person gets injured the state will end up picking up the tab for them. But that's a separate issue.
This is an interesting argument, but I'm not sure that it holds water. Most breakins occur when a structure is unoccupied. Nobody wants to be in a game of who shoots first. There are occasionally home invasion robberies but these are often targeted. Most burglars will leave once they know somebody is home. Rapists may be another story but they are already ready for a violent confrontation.
Bullets are unlikely to be cheaper. Sure the bullet itself is. But then you have to pay for the police investigation and running the courts and the lawyers. And if you shoot the wrong person by accident, the cost can be millions. Suddenly some bags of rice and cheese look appealing.
But what percentage of crime would universal income solve? At least in the US most petty crime is done to support a drug habit and I'm not convinced that drug users won't blow their income on the first day and then go out and keep committing crimes until their next government paycheck. I like the idea of the minimum universal income for many reasons, but reducing crime doesn't seem to be one of the real benefits.
You end up encrypting and decrypting traffic when all you really need is a proxy server. I think I need to go into business selling the use of proxies ostensibly for the use of geolocation testing but actually for this type of purpose. As long as the proxy can rewrite the requests sufficiently, the VPN encryption doesn't really add anything but it must chew up an insane amount of CPU time somewhere. It's a testament to modern hardware that this can even be done in realtime for an HD stream. Of course I don't actually use VPN for this purpose. I watch whatever is included with Amazon Prime and that's about it.
Of course I'm not suggesting that a bottle of water will be used as a weapon. What I'm saying is that a law-abiding citizen who has passed the background test and training class to carry a concealed weapon makes an honest mistake and forgets to store their weapon before leaving for the airport, it's no different than when grandma forgets to unpack her knitting needles or a businessman forgets that his new grooming kit includes some tiny nail clippers. It's a prohibited item and you can either dispose of it, go back and put it in your car, or put it in your checked baggage. If you don't have dangerous *intent* with something, it's easy to forget that you have it with you. Knitting needles and nail clippers can through accident, theft, opportunity, drunkenness or otherwise magically become weapons! It's not that we should allow guns through the checkpoint it's that we shouldn't overreact. If the person doesn't have permission to own/carry the gun, we ought to charge them with a crime. But if they do have that permission it shouldn't be more serious than a speeding ticket.
If the bottle of water was a liquid explosive in the hands of somebody with bad intent, it's probably *more* dangerous than a gun in the hands of somebody with bad intent. On the other hand it if's an innocent mistake, the two are about equally as dangerous. If the guns were so dangerous, we wouldn't have pilots carrying them.
If you're accustomed to carrying around a holstered weapon, it would be easy to forget that you have to do something special with it. How many people leave bottled water in their carryons? Probably 2,000 people a day! And a properly holstered pistol in the hands of a qualified carrier isn't any more dangerous. Of course the penalty for forgetting it is higher. Even easier to make the mistake if you keep it in a bag. You're thinking about so many things.
This is actually the main reason I've never considered carrying a weapon, even when I lived in areas without police presence. It's not feasible to always know what you are going to do that day and the rules for where you can and cannot carry a weapon are so complicated that it's impossible to stay on the right side of the law if you don't research your whole routine ahead of time. Stop at the Chinese restaurant to pick up dinner sure. Hey the dry cleaners is next door, let me pick up my stuff. Oh wait, I just committed a felony for carrying a weapon into the laundromat. No thanks.
Yes, but if there is a wild miscalculation in terms of the residual value, it's the leasing company that loses. Of course they charge a fee for taking that risk, but it's a form of insurance that makes sense for many people.
Well banks are pretty insecure. You show them your ATM card and 4 digit PIN and you can do just about anything. Ten years ago, I did my banking somewhere that they used a fool-proof biometric identification system. The chances of walk-in fraud were pretty low. Now all you need is to skim an ATM card and PIN and you can do all kinds of transactions inside the bank without question. The ATMs have a transaction limit to prevent large fraud. But you can do a lot more at the teller.
I hope that the OP was going for a +1 Funny although I'm probably now going to get a -1 because I read TFA.
Banking on your phone is still the most secure option. If you have a Nexus branded device or a third-party one with Google Play services and get your apps from the Play store, there's no risk here whatsoever. This only affects those who have allowed apps from "untrusted" sources. The fact that anti-virus can't pick it up only shows that anti-virus is stupid and you shouldn't be running it on your phone.
Drive-By downloads can sometimes happen on desktop windows machines due to bugs. But on Android, it's impossible. You might as well say you won't bank on your desktop machine. The whole point of running stock Android is that Google can protect your garden better than you can. Some will be frustrated that Google holds the keys so to speak, but the fact is that they are probably better at managing devices than I would be. They have a bit more scale.
I don't know whether there 100kW estimate was during the ascent stage or descent. I'm surprised it's generating during ascent. Would be easier to harness energy on the way down. But in any event, you could have two kites 180 degrees out of phase so to speak to ensure pretty continuous power.l
It would have to be a system with a very low speed fan and a two-stage compressor and/or two separate compressors. You have a fancier system than me and this may all be standard. I have a 4 Ton unit heating 2300sq/ft of space. Even in the afternoon on the hottest of summer days, the compressor only runs about 30% of the time. If the compressor were set to run continuously it would be arctic.
Insulation doesn't make that much of a difference here in Florida. The reason is that we just don't have much of a temperature gradient. In a residential setting, you don't need much cooling at all. Mostly just a way to reduce humidity but the AC unit is the only means available. I have a pretty plain vanilla system and I set it just a few degrees below ambient to ensure that the thing runs and keeps humidity down. Sure there a a few hundred degree days but even then it's only terribly hot for a few hours. Most of the time, my house is within about 5F of the outside temperature so you just can't save much with insulation.
My house is about 15 years old. Newer models are adding efficiency features and guaranteeing an average heating / cooling cost of about $100 for the same size unit. I can't measure my heating/cooling cost in isolation since I also do things like cook and do laundry but it's probably around $140 or so. There just isn't a lot to gain in heating/cooling in this area.
On the other hand, in the Northeast, I remember $300 gas bills for a place half the size and a smart thermostat might make sense.
I'm in the same climate with similar numbers. I have a pre-school aged child and somebody is home all the time. We don't use any of the programmable features of the thermostat. Just pick a comfortable temperature and leave it there!
The issue isn't another app seeing the framebuffer used by Chrome incognito. That's probably harmless. The issue is that, if the pages aren't being zeroed properly, there may be other sensitive information that leaks. What if somebody comes up with GPU accelerated TLS? Sure they *should* zero the pages too. The problem is that there are *a lot* of places where applications would need to zero memory. And it turns out that it's way too easy to screw this up. Hence the feature has been moved to the operating system to ensure that it's done consistently. Silly for everybody to reinvent the wheel anyway.
If you're calling this a bug in Diablo, you are kind of missing the point. If the data is left in memory, another process on the machine would be able to retrieve that data for malicious purposes. An actual exploit of this vulnerability would be quite tricky, but it does end up happening. This is really a simpler version of the famous Heartbleed bug. What we've seen returned in *this* case is just some graphical data, but there's no reason to believe that it couldn't be something like a private key that's available. If the GPU was being used for TLS acceleration as an example. This type of bug has been exploited very successfully in the past which is why the OS clears out main memory before handing it to a process. There is another informative post in this thread about how the Linux kernel does this very efficiently. It shouldn't be necessary to wait for a vulnerability to be brutally exploited before deciding to fix it.
It was never intended to be banned. Writing laws that are very exact is hard. It's like writing software without bugs. Only the debugging cycle is very long and infested with politics. It's amazing we get any sane laws at all.
Slashdot Mirror
There is a lot of misunderstanding around no-fault insurance. If you look at insurance as a tax that adds no value, you probably hate the no-fault provisions. On the other hand, if you want to protect yourself and your family, the no-fault model works a lot better. If I have a no-fault personal-injury protection policy for $1 million, I'm guaranteed that my medical bills get covered if I'm in a wreck. OTOH if no-fault insurance isn't an option, the person who runs into me may have only the state minimum required liability insurance (like $30k or something). This isn't a risk that I can take. So I'd have to buy a policy for $0.997 million dollars to cover the deficiency. The price of the two are probably about the same. The "no fault" provisions don't apply to property damage. Of course maybe the person had no insurance at all, so now I'm really back to buying the full policy. If an indigent person gets injured the state will end up picking up the tab for them. But that's a separate issue.
This is an interesting argument, but I'm not sure that it holds water. Most breakins occur when a structure is unoccupied. Nobody wants to be in a game of who shoots first. There are occasionally home invasion robberies but these are often targeted. Most burglars will leave once they know somebody is home. Rapists may be another story but they are already ready for a violent confrontation.
Bullets are unlikely to be cheaper. Sure the bullet itself is. But then you have to pay for the police investigation and running the courts and the lawyers. And if you shoot the wrong person by accident, the cost can be millions. Suddenly some bags of rice and cheese look appealing.
But what percentage of crime would universal income solve? At least in the US most petty crime is done to support a drug habit and I'm not convinced that drug users won't blow their income on the first day and then go out and keep committing crimes until their next government paycheck. I like the idea of the minimum universal income for many reasons, but reducing crime doesn't seem to be one of the real benefits.
You end up encrypting and decrypting traffic when all you really need is a proxy server. I think I need to go into business selling the use of proxies ostensibly for the use of geolocation testing but actually for this type of purpose. As long as the proxy can rewrite the requests sufficiently, the VPN encryption doesn't really add anything but it must chew up an insane amount of CPU time somewhere. It's a testament to modern hardware that this can even be done in realtime for an HD stream. Of course I don't actually use VPN for this purpose. I watch whatever is included with Amazon Prime and that's about it.
That's a great question and I hope that somebody posts an answer!
Of course I'm not suggesting that a bottle of water will be used as a weapon. What I'm saying is that a law-abiding citizen who has passed the background test and training class to carry a concealed weapon makes an honest mistake and forgets to store their weapon before leaving for the airport, it's no different than when grandma forgets to unpack her knitting needles or a businessman forgets that his new grooming kit includes some tiny nail clippers. It's a prohibited item and you can either dispose of it, go back and put it in your car, or put it in your checked baggage. If you don't have dangerous *intent* with something, it's easy to forget that you have it with you. Knitting needles and nail clippers can through accident, theft, opportunity, drunkenness or otherwise magically become weapons! It's not that we should allow guns through the checkpoint it's that we shouldn't overreact. If the person doesn't have permission to own/carry the gun, we ought to charge them with a crime. But if they do have that permission it shouldn't be more serious than a speeding ticket.
If the bottle of water was a liquid explosive in the hands of somebody with bad intent, it's probably *more* dangerous than a gun in the hands of somebody with bad intent. On the other hand it if's an innocent mistake, the two are about equally as dangerous. If the guns were so dangerous, we wouldn't have pilots carrying them.
Substitute a bottle of water, see how many people accidentally bring those, and you might change your mind on the severity of this infraction.
I believe that the cockpit doors are bullet proof, so you can't even accomplish anything by shooting. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bu...
If you're accustomed to carrying around a holstered weapon, it would be easy to forget that you have to do something special with it. How many people leave bottled water in their carryons? Probably 2,000 people a day! And a properly holstered pistol in the hands of a qualified carrier isn't any more dangerous. Of course the penalty for forgetting it is higher. Even easier to make the mistake if you keep it in a bag. You're thinking about so many things.
Yes. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bu...
This is actually the main reason I've never considered carrying a weapon, even when I lived in areas without police presence. It's not feasible to always know what you are going to do that day and the rules for where you can and cannot carry a weapon are so complicated that it's impossible to stay on the right side of the law if you don't research your whole routine ahead of time. Stop at the Chinese restaurant to pick up dinner sure. Hey the dry cleaners is next door, let me pick up my stuff. Oh wait, I just committed a felony for carrying a weapon into the laundromat. No thanks.
Yes, but if there is a wild miscalculation in terms of the residual value, it's the leasing company that loses. Of course they charge a fee for taking that risk, but it's a form of insurance that makes sense for many people.
Well banks are pretty insecure. You show them your ATM card and 4 digit PIN and you can do just about anything. Ten years ago, I did my banking somewhere that they used a fool-proof biometric identification system. The chances of walk-in fraud were pretty low. Now all you need is to skim an ATM card and PIN and you can do all kinds of transactions inside the bank without question. The ATMs have a transaction limit to prevent large fraud. But you can do a lot more at the teller.
I hope that the OP was going for a +1 Funny although I'm probably now going to get a -1 because I read TFA. Banking on your phone is still the most secure option. If you have a Nexus branded device or a third-party one with Google Play services and get your apps from the Play store, there's no risk here whatsoever. This only affects those who have allowed apps from "untrusted" sources. The fact that anti-virus can't pick it up only shows that anti-virus is stupid and you shouldn't be running it on your phone. Drive-By downloads can sometimes happen on desktop windows machines due to bugs. But on Android, it's impossible. You might as well say you won't bank on your desktop machine. The whole point of running stock Android is that Google can protect your garden better than you can. Some will be frustrated that Google holds the keys so to speak, but the fact is that they are probably better at managing devices than I would be. They have a bit more scale.
I don't know whether there 100kW estimate was during the ascent stage or descent. I'm surprised it's generating during ascent. Would be easier to harness energy on the way down. But in any event, you could have two kites 180 degrees out of phase so to speak to ensure pretty continuous power.l
It would have to be a system with a very low speed fan and a two-stage compressor and/or two separate compressors. You have a fancier system than me and this may all be standard. I have a 4 Ton unit heating 2300sq/ft of space. Even in the afternoon on the hottest of summer days, the compressor only runs about 30% of the time. If the compressor were set to run continuously it would be arctic.
Insulation doesn't make that much of a difference here in Florida. The reason is that we just don't have much of a temperature gradient. In a residential setting, you don't need much cooling at all. Mostly just a way to reduce humidity but the AC unit is the only means available. I have a pretty plain vanilla system and I set it just a few degrees below ambient to ensure that the thing runs and keeps humidity down. Sure there a a few hundred degree days but even then it's only terribly hot for a few hours. Most of the time, my house is within about 5F of the outside temperature so you just can't save much with insulation. My house is about 15 years old. Newer models are adding efficiency features and guaranteeing an average heating / cooling cost of about $100 for the same size unit. I can't measure my heating/cooling cost in isolation since I also do things like cook and do laundry but it's probably around $140 or so. There just isn't a lot to gain in heating/cooling in this area. On the other hand, in the Northeast, I remember $300 gas bills for a place half the size and a smart thermostat might make sense.
I'm in the same climate with similar numbers. I have a pre-school aged child and somebody is home all the time. We don't use any of the programmable features of the thermostat. Just pick a comfortable temperature and leave it there!
I have no idea why this is a zero moderation. If the first thing you've learned about thermostat wiring is the OP, you probably shouldn't try it.
The issue isn't another app seeing the framebuffer used by Chrome incognito. That's probably harmless. The issue is that, if the pages aren't being zeroed properly, there may be other sensitive information that leaks. What if somebody comes up with GPU accelerated TLS? Sure they *should* zero the pages too. The problem is that there are *a lot* of places where applications would need to zero memory. And it turns out that it's way too easy to screw this up. Hence the feature has been moved to the operating system to ensure that it's done consistently. Silly for everybody to reinvent the wheel anyway.
If you're calling this a bug in Diablo, you are kind of missing the point. If the data is left in memory, another process on the machine would be able to retrieve that data for malicious purposes. An actual exploit of this vulnerability would be quite tricky, but it does end up happening. This is really a simpler version of the famous Heartbleed bug. What we've seen returned in *this* case is just some graphical data, but there's no reason to believe that it couldn't be something like a private key that's available. If the GPU was being used for TLS acceleration as an example. This type of bug has been exploited very successfully in the past which is why the OS clears out main memory before handing it to a process. There is another informative post in this thread about how the Linux kernel does this very efficiently. It shouldn't be necessary to wait for a vulnerability to be brutally exploited before deciding to fix it.
It was never intended to be banned. Writing laws that are very exact is hard. It's like writing software without bugs. Only the debugging cycle is very long and infested with politics. It's amazing we get any sane laws at all.
I believe that's exactly what this law does. It *clarifies* that this decision is up to the parents.