Try 30 to 40 years. This has been going on since the 70's and was dramatically advanced during the 80's when the war on drugs was started and all sorts of constitutional protections were waived by putting the word "drugs" on any request. Just because Snowden made you aware of the NSA doesn't mean this surveillance state only started 10 years ago. It's been under construction for a long time. Every time we allow the state a step they take two and demand another.
Today if the Fed's get your fingerprints, DNA or any personal information on you it immediately is put in the FBI database and will never ever be deleted. Within a generation 90% of the US populations DNA will be tracked by the Feds. Your DNA is by far the most personal information you hold and it literally has no protection whatsoever.
Who needs their track record on security when you've got a proven track record with abandoned embedded software? There are millions of ATMs and other embedded windows XP machines out there languishing as unsupported because they trusted Microsoft. Millions of ATM's and other embedded computer devices will be replaced not because they need to be, but because the operating system running them is no longer supported.
Any company with an ounce of care about the future would NOT use Microsoft for any embedded application. Windows 10 embedded just like XP embedded will be abandoned in the future and every company that relied on it will be forced to replace perfectly functional hardware and software.
The funny part is the embedded market frequently sees device lifetimes that far exceed Microsofts support timeframes and yet they continue to get business in the embedded marketplace. The only viable operating system for embedded systems is Linux or maybe one of the BSD's. Everything that's not FOSS will be abandoned long before the device lifetime is reached.
The law defines above 500' as public airspace regulated by the FAA. The use of Public in the statue indicates that it's owned by the public and regulated by the government with exclusive authority to regulate delegated by congress to the FAA. As there is no designation by congress on what happens below 500' it could be construed to be private, but could also be regulated by state law or individual federal jurisdictional rulings (as in each district court could have different precedent) or even FAA decisions.
As 0-500' isn't regulated by federal statute you would need a lawyer to tell you who owns what in those 500' that's specific to your jurisdiction. Depending on the state it may be well defined, as states like California have well defined laws in place regarding air space but other more rural states may have no legal definitions.
The main point is that at 500' and above you have no private property rights, the area above that is public airspace governed by the FAA. If someone gets FAA approval they could park a drone at 501' above your property and indefinitely monitor you and there isn't a damn thing you could do about it.
This is an outright lie. You have exclusive control of air rights up to 500 feet. Beyond that the control is exclusive to the FAA by federal statute.
In the United States, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has the sole authority to control all public airspace, exclusively determining the rules and requirements for its use. Public air space is classified as the 'navigable' airspace above 500 feet.
As was pointed out in the previous thread, the state this occurred in requires that there be posted no trespassing signs for it to be trespassing. No such signs existed.
You do NOT control the airspace over your property. You have exclusive air rights up to 500 feet, beyond that it is the exclusive jurisdiction of the FAA.
You can speculate all you want but one of the points of these regulations is to make gunfire apparent so people call it in. There are very high odds any firearm discharge would have resulted in a call to the authorities to report it. It would have been significantly harder for them to prove it was him if he had shot vermin, without witness by a neighbor, but odds are one of his neighbors would have called in about the gun shot.
The criminal endangerment is most likely for discharging a firearm within city limits. These statues make no exceptions for firing upward with birdshot, they draw a line and say you can't fire a weapon in city unless you are at an approved firing range. It wouldn't have mattered if he was trying to shoot crows or rats, they still would have charged him. It's in everyone's interest to prevent the firing of guns in cities.
He'll be sued for reimbursement within small claims court. Given that his gunfire was illegal to begin with the drone owner will likely win.
Are you deliberately failing to see the politics of this? There is a political reason to say 200 licenses per employee rather than saying $200 per employee. The first is inflammatory and seems to indicate significant "over-licensing" of product while the second would probably be considered reasonable by most people (about the cost of windows). By failing to talk about cost per employee they are politically directing the conversation towards an outcome they already want.
This isn't much different than the annual list of wasted money several republican senators come up with every year, the most famous of which was the $200 toilet seat and the $500 hammer, without any regard to how those items weren't run of the mill items and the costs of tooling of single low quantity orders have to be be born by the limited number of items. In reality both of those items made sense with the knowledge of the reason behind them, so the reasoning is left off and the bare price is used to condemn inefficient government as a political ploy to propagandize the public into supporting policies detrimental to the majority.
If it was legal to scam them they would be flooded with offers from so many girls it would either bankrupt them or they would stop recruiting because of all the scams. It would seriously disrupt their recruiting.
It's just like banning people from joining them. We should be lining those people up and flying them over there right after they sign papers saying they aren't citizens anymore. Let them go, fight and die as long as they never return. They won't be in our country anymore. And on the flip side it should be perfectly legal to scam them. They are a criminal organization and I personally like the old world idea that someone that's breaking the law and fighting prosecution is then outside the law including it's protections. There aren't innocents in groups like ISIS, everyone should be free to target them with any action that would normally be deemed criminal.
What do you wanna bet Oracles new sparc chip includes functions that automatically call home and report on violations of obscure licensing provisions that someone may not have realized they violated.
Proficiency in 10key can literally double or triple typing rates where the data is numeric. There are a lot of data entry jobs that won't even consider anyone that's not 10key proficient because it makes such a big difference in data entry ability.
Regardless, all I was trying to say is that there are a lot of people out there that won't buy keyboards/laptops that don't have 10key. It's enough market demand that you frequently find laptop keyboards with 10 key even if it makes the rest of the keyboard smaller. The manufacturers wouldn't be doing this if there wasn't a demand for it.
The numeric keypad tends to be pretty highly valued by typists that are 10key proficient and type a lot of numbers. It's actually more common than you probably believe. I and many others prefer to buy laptops/keyboards with the 10 key numeric in place.
Re:Windows 10 is tightly locked to Microsoft servi
on
Windows 10 Launches
·
· Score: 1
I don't think they should count on that. They've been giving Google so much hell in Europe I'd expect Google to pay them back and launch similar complaints about Windows 10. The US government might not do anything but I'm willing to bet other world governments will.
The precedents that the Supreme court has put in place authorizing the drug war laws allow things like this to happen. The court has basically put down the law that the end justifies the means. You can see this most apparently in Civil forfeiture where the government sues property not the owner of said property. Because this was targeting drug proceeds it was deemed ok even though it's a clear violation of the 4th amendment. Now that law is being abused to take money from small business owners and anyone in possession of any cash.
The natural extension of the drug war exceptions was to allow police to be wrong about the law yet still be able to pull someone over and search them based on that officer not knowing the law. Hence an illegal search based on an officer being wrong about the law is allowed because cops are allowed to be wrong about the law but you aren't.
Involuntary commitment to an institution is incredibly rare in the US. You need to be an active threat to yourself or others to be forcibly committed. For this to happen you basically have to prove to a court the person is going to hurt someone. Often this results in a guardian being appointed with power of attorney and that person can sign someone into a treatment facility.
There are very good reasons for this. Before these policies were in place, that required a court order to commit someone against their will, the commitment procedure was routinely used to commit someone that family, friends or someone with power wanted to put into a secure facility with little to no regard for their actual mental state. This resulted in things like during the 50's for it to be common for daughters deemed "promiscuous" to be involuntarily committed, even if they were well into their 20's. Or the towns rebellious kid from a poor family being committed and lobotomized because he the mayor didn't want his daughter dating that "freak".
Involuntary commitment is a very dangerous thing. It should be reserved for the most extreme cases because otherwise it will be abused. Although I don't like that most of the long term homeless in the US are actually mentally ill the fact is most of them want to be where they are. You can't have a free society if you are going to decide that if people don't abide certain societal customs that they need to be locked up and forcibly medicated. That direction lies authoritarian government. The only time involuntary commitment should even be an option is in the case of actual violence or imminent violence that can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Hubbard had been committed several times and by all non-scientology accounts he was pretty friggen crazy. In the end he even tried to get someone in scientology to build a device that he could use to kill himself because of his depression.
Getting anyone committed or in a forced hold is almost impossible. You have to prove they are going to hurt someone physically. The woman ruined her life but I doubt she had one incident where she was deemed to be dangerous enough to warrant a hold and psychiatric evaluation. This is true even if you are married to someone.
After 20 years of crazy the guy probably had enough. At some point even if you love the person the crazy gets to be more than you can handle and you have to put your own needs above the needs of the marriage. I say this as someone that doesn't believes that marriage should be forever. But having first hand experience with mental illness in a loved one I can tell you that at some point people need to just take care of themselves so their own mental health doesn't deteriorate.
It's a self applied name. Someone called them crackpots and they called themselves 9/11 truthers. Now truther is an anachronism for crackpot by their own doing.
And you forgot to mention that starving people are very dangerous. They do things like whack the heads of the untouchable elites because they have nothing to lose whether they succeed or not.
He's saying "use drones to be able to use your limited resources more intelligently" - for example, focusing on getting that jaws-of-life to a potentially critically injured car accident victim rather than diverting to a probable false alarm house fire.
If you honestly think that such a thing even happens you are as foolish as him. You are creating a straw man with an event that's as rare as unicorn sightings.
The fact is that budgets are limited and you can't have an infinite number of rescue workers responding to everything.
Many of these budgets have fixed costs, for example you have 20 firefighters sitting around 24/7/365 (multiple shifts). And these firefighters aren't in new york responding to calls every few minutes. They spend 90% of every day sitting on their ass, just like every other sub-urban/rural firefighter.
And compared to the salaries and overheads of humans, drones are very cheap.
I see your malfunction now. You seem to think that drones fly themselves. That the guy sitting there flying the drone is invisible and doesn't cost salary and overhead. That the drone itself doesn't require maintenance, fuel, parts or will need a ground crew. You are WRONG. The drone is going to cost almost as much to operate as it would cost to put a plane up (except it's cheaper to buy than a plane). And the guy flying it? He's going to cost as much as a highly trained pilot because he's going to be one. This thing is the size of a fridge, it falls out of the sky and lands on someone it's going to kill them. The FAA isn't going to allow anything that size to be flown without someone with a pilots license behind the controls, as they've already decreed BTW.
You also seem to be of the view that drones are miraculous and can spot people in a gutter or a lost child in a forest. People in manned helicopters have a hard time spotting that stuff, how on earth do you think a drone could do it so easy?
Drones aren't miracles. You seem to think they are. This plan is nothing more than some jackass with a hobby that wants the taxpayers to fund it.
You forgot the fuel, maintenance and spare parts. I'd be willing to bet daily operating costs will be equivalent to having a plane up.
A plane is a plane, doesn't really matter if it's manned or not, it's still going to cost about the same, unless you think you can train bob the high school drop out to fly a drone and the drones operate on hugs and happy thoughts.
It really doesn't matter what you think the law is. If they can get a judge to go along, a jury to convict you and an appeals court to uphold it you WILL got to jail. The CFAA has allowed far lesser things to put people in jail. The CFAA is so incredibly generic that they can put you in jail for almost anything involving a computer, and it's so technical in nature that you're guaranteed a jury won't understand it which means the government has a major advantage. This is doubly true for the courts, both the original and the appeals.
I wouldn't be so cavalier about the CFAA, Aaron Swartz had a view similar to yours then he was looking at 25 years in Federal jail and killed himself under the stress of being raped daily for 25 years. What he did wasn't technically illegal either and the people involved didn't even want to prosecute him.
Slashdot Mirror
10 years? Seriously?
Try 30 to 40 years. This has been going on since the 70's and was dramatically advanced during the 80's when the war on drugs was started and all sorts of constitutional protections were waived by putting the word "drugs" on any request. Just because Snowden made you aware of the NSA doesn't mean this surveillance state only started 10 years ago. It's been under construction for a long time. Every time we allow the state a step they take two and demand another.
Today if the Fed's get your fingerprints, DNA or any personal information on you it immediately is put in the FBI database and will never ever be deleted. Within a generation 90% of the US populations DNA will be tracked by the Feds. Your DNA is by far the most personal information you hold and it literally has no protection whatsoever.
Who needs their track record on security when you've got a proven track record with abandoned embedded software? There are millions of ATMs and other embedded windows XP machines out there languishing as unsupported because they trusted Microsoft. Millions of ATM's and other embedded computer devices will be replaced not because they need to be, but because the operating system running them is no longer supported.
Any company with an ounce of care about the future would NOT use Microsoft for any embedded application. Windows 10 embedded just like XP embedded will be abandoned in the future and every company that relied on it will be forced to replace perfectly functional hardware and software.
The funny part is the embedded market frequently sees device lifetimes that far exceed Microsofts support timeframes and yet they continue to get business in the embedded marketplace. The only viable operating system for embedded systems is Linux or maybe one of the BSD's. Everything that's not FOSS will be abandoned long before the device lifetime is reached.
The law defines above 500' as public airspace regulated by the FAA. The use of Public in the statue indicates that it's owned by the public and regulated by the government with exclusive authority to regulate delegated by congress to the FAA. As there is no designation by congress on what happens below 500' it could be construed to be private, but could also be regulated by state law or individual federal jurisdictional rulings (as in each district court could have different precedent) or even FAA decisions.
As 0-500' isn't regulated by federal statute you would need a lawyer to tell you who owns what in those 500' that's specific to your jurisdiction. Depending on the state it may be well defined, as states like California have well defined laws in place regarding air space but other more rural states may have no legal definitions.
The main point is that at 500' and above you have no private property rights, the area above that is public airspace governed by the FAA. If someone gets FAA approval they could park a drone at 501' above your property and indefinitely monitor you and there isn't a damn thing you could do about it.
This is an outright lie. You have exclusive control of air rights up to 500 feet. Beyond that the control is exclusive to the FAA by federal statute.
49 U.S.C. 180, 49 U.S.C.A. 18 , 40103 "use of airspace"
And because you don't know, the stuff that follows the quote is the section of US law that covers the quote.
As was pointed out in the previous thread, the state this occurred in requires that there be posted no trespassing signs for it to be trespassing. No such signs existed.
You do NOT control the airspace over your property. You have exclusive air rights up to 500 feet, beyond that it is the exclusive jurisdiction of the FAA.
You can speculate all you want but one of the points of these regulations is to make gunfire apparent so people call it in. There are very high odds any firearm discharge would have resulted in a call to the authorities to report it. It would have been significantly harder for them to prove it was him if he had shot vermin, without witness by a neighbor, but odds are one of his neighbors would have called in about the gun shot.
The criminal endangerment is most likely for discharging a firearm within city limits. These statues make no exceptions for firing upward with birdshot, they draw a line and say you can't fire a weapon in city unless you are at an approved firing range. It wouldn't have mattered if he was trying to shoot crows or rats, they still would have charged him. It's in everyone's interest to prevent the firing of guns in cities.
He'll be sued for reimbursement within small claims court. Given that his gunfire was illegal to begin with the drone owner will likely win.
Are you deliberately failing to see the politics of this? There is a political reason to say 200 licenses per employee rather than saying $200 per employee. The first is inflammatory and seems to indicate significant "over-licensing" of product while the second would probably be considered reasonable by most people (about the cost of windows). By failing to talk about cost per employee they are politically directing the conversation towards an outcome they already want.
This isn't much different than the annual list of wasted money several republican senators come up with every year, the most famous of which was the $200 toilet seat and the $500 hammer, without any regard to how those items weren't run of the mill items and the costs of tooling of single low quantity orders have to be be born by the limited number of items. In reality both of those items made sense with the knowledge of the reason behind them, so the reasoning is left off and the bare price is used to condemn inefficient government as a political ploy to propagandize the public into supporting policies detrimental to the majority.
If it was legal to scam them they would be flooded with offers from so many girls it would either bankrupt them or they would stop recruiting because of all the scams. It would seriously disrupt their recruiting.
It's just like banning people from joining them. We should be lining those people up and flying them over there right after they sign papers saying they aren't citizens anymore. Let them go, fight and die as long as they never return. They won't be in our country anymore. And on the flip side it should be perfectly legal to scam them. They are a criminal organization and I personally like the old world idea that someone that's breaking the law and fighting prosecution is then outside the law including it's protections. There aren't innocents in groups like ISIS, everyone should be free to target them with any action that would normally be deemed criminal.
What do you wanna bet Oracles new sparc chip includes functions that automatically call home and report on violations of obscure licensing provisions that someone may not have realized they violated.
Proficiency in 10key can literally double or triple typing rates where the data is numeric. There are a lot of data entry jobs that won't even consider anyone that's not 10key proficient because it makes such a big difference in data entry ability.
Regardless, all I was trying to say is that there are a lot of people out there that won't buy keyboards/laptops that don't have 10key. It's enough market demand that you frequently find laptop keyboards with 10 key even if it makes the rest of the keyboard smaller. The manufacturers wouldn't be doing this if there wasn't a demand for it.
The numeric keypad tends to be pretty highly valued by typists that are 10key proficient and type a lot of numbers. It's actually more common than you probably believe. I and many others prefer to buy laptops/keyboards with the 10 key numeric in place.
I don't think they should count on that. They've been giving Google so much hell in Europe I'd expect Google to pay them back and launch similar complaints about Windows 10. The US government might not do anything but I'm willing to bet other world governments will.
According to the article she recorded 4 minutes of the 91 minute call and that was likely the basis for the wiretapping motion.
The precedents that the Supreme court has put in place authorizing the drug war laws allow things like this to happen. The court has basically put down the law that the end justifies the means. You can see this most apparently in Civil forfeiture where the government sues property not the owner of said property. Because this was targeting drug proceeds it was deemed ok even though it's a clear violation of the 4th amendment. Now that law is being abused to take money from small business owners and anyone in possession of any cash.
The natural extension of the drug war exceptions was to allow police to be wrong about the law yet still be able to pull someone over and search them based on that officer not knowing the law. Hence an illegal search based on an officer being wrong about the law is allowed because cops are allowed to be wrong about the law but you aren't.
What did you expect when Dish bought them?
You should have expected it.
Involuntary commitment to an institution is incredibly rare in the US. You need to be an active threat to yourself or others to be forcibly committed. For this to happen you basically have to prove to a court the person is going to hurt someone. Often this results in a guardian being appointed with power of attorney and that person can sign someone into a treatment facility.
There are very good reasons for this. Before these policies were in place, that required a court order to commit someone against their will, the commitment procedure was routinely used to commit someone that family, friends or someone with power wanted to put into a secure facility with little to no regard for their actual mental state. This resulted in things like during the 50's for it to be common for daughters deemed "promiscuous" to be involuntarily committed, even if they were well into their 20's. Or the towns rebellious kid from a poor family being committed and lobotomized because he the mayor didn't want his daughter dating that "freak".
Involuntary commitment is a very dangerous thing. It should be reserved for the most extreme cases because otherwise it will be abused. Although I don't like that most of the long term homeless in the US are actually mentally ill the fact is most of them want to be where they are. You can't have a free society if you are going to decide that if people don't abide certain societal customs that they need to be locked up and forcibly medicated. That direction lies authoritarian government. The only time involuntary commitment should even be an option is in the case of actual violence or imminent violence that can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Hubbard had been committed several times and by all non-scientology accounts he was pretty friggen crazy. In the end he even tried to get someone in scientology to build a device that he could use to kill himself because of his depression.
Getting anyone committed or in a forced hold is almost impossible. You have to prove they are going to hurt someone physically. The woman ruined her life but I doubt she had one incident where she was deemed to be dangerous enough to warrant a hold and psychiatric evaluation. This is true even if you are married to someone.
After 20 years of crazy the guy probably had enough. At some point even if you love the person the crazy gets to be more than you can handle and you have to put your own needs above the needs of the marriage. I say this as someone that doesn't believes that marriage should be forever. But having first hand experience with mental illness in a loved one I can tell you that at some point people need to just take care of themselves so their own mental health doesn't deteriorate.
It's a self applied name. Someone called them crackpots and they called themselves 9/11 truthers. Now truther is an anachronism for crackpot by their own doing.
It got you to give Dice clicks now didn't it.
And you forgot to mention that starving people are very dangerous. They do things like whack the heads of the untouchable elites because they have nothing to lose whether they succeed or not.
If you honestly think that such a thing even happens you are as foolish as him. You are creating a straw man with an event that's as rare as unicorn sightings.
Many of these budgets have fixed costs, for example you have 20 firefighters sitting around 24/7/365 (multiple shifts). And these firefighters aren't in new york responding to calls every few minutes. They spend 90% of every day sitting on their ass, just like every other sub-urban/rural firefighter.
I see your malfunction now. You seem to think that drones fly themselves. That the guy sitting there flying the drone is invisible and doesn't cost salary and overhead. That the drone itself doesn't require maintenance, fuel, parts or will need a ground crew. You are WRONG. The drone is going to cost almost as much to operate as it would cost to put a plane up (except it's cheaper to buy than a plane). And the guy flying it? He's going to cost as much as a highly trained pilot because he's going to be one. This thing is the size of a fridge, it falls out of the sky and lands on someone it's going to kill them. The FAA isn't going to allow anything that size to be flown without someone with a pilots license behind the controls, as they've already decreed BTW.
You also seem to be of the view that drones are miraculous and can spot people in a gutter or a lost child in a forest. People in manned helicopters have a hard time spotting that stuff, how on earth do you think a drone could do it so easy?
Drones aren't miracles. You seem to think they are. This plan is nothing more than some jackass with a hobby that wants the taxpayers to fund it.
You forgot the fuel, maintenance and spare parts. I'd be willing to bet daily operating costs will be equivalent to having a plane up.
A plane is a plane, doesn't really matter if it's manned or not, it's still going to cost about the same, unless you think you can train bob the high school drop out to fly a drone and the drones operate on hugs and happy thoughts.
It really doesn't matter what you think the law is. If they can get a judge to go along, a jury to convict you and an appeals court to uphold it you WILL got to jail. The CFAA has allowed far lesser things to put people in jail. The CFAA is so incredibly generic that they can put you in jail for almost anything involving a computer, and it's so technical in nature that you're guaranteed a jury won't understand it which means the government has a major advantage. This is doubly true for the courts, both the original and the appeals.
I wouldn't be so cavalier about the CFAA, Aaron Swartz had a view similar to yours then he was looking at 25 years in Federal jail and killed himself under the stress of being raped daily for 25 years. What he did wasn't technically illegal either and the people involved didn't even want to prosecute him.