So any company that does any contract work for the government is a place to avoid then. Many companies test because they are required to by law because they do business with the Government.
Or more likely it's all designed to push sales of newer iPhones. They've said repeatedly that this only works on older devices. So Apple recruited the FBI to increase sales by scaring people in to rushing out and updating older but still fully functional devices. This was it doesn't look like an ad campaign, and they get tons of global Airtime pushing the name of Apple as being secure. Especially if you have a device newer and better than the 5c.
Just because we have ROE in place to avoid international incidents with intentionally provocative nations does not mean we are owned. You can be sure those Russkies were lit up with the air defense systems and had they tried to act they would have been shot down in a heartbeat. Ditto with the Iranians shooting rockets, the flight paths were analyzed and determined to be intentional misses and so we did not respond. Again to avoid creating an international incident possibly leading to more conflict and direct combat. They spoofed the GPS signals to bring UAV down in their territory. North Korea is just rattling it's sabers, and we did respond by conducting our regularly scheduled joint training exercise with the ROK forces. The A-10 has been out of production for years. The issue is that the Air force wants to retire it, but nobody has owned an A-10 it rules the close air support realm. And the F-22 was intentionally limited in production to 122 aircraft.
Exactly what about showing restraint equals being owned? The closest to being owned is the Russian fly-byes and the Iranians spoofing the UAV. The UAV incident was due to our hubris in not encrypting the data stream letting the Iranians realize the craft was flying and giving them the opportunity to try to spoof it. The Russians well those very brave pilots have to know that come Jan 20 of next year the ROE may change substantially. Or if the captain of the ship begins to think that the aircraft is actually a threat it will be smashed and hard. At the range it flew by it's not only well inside the missile envelope but also inside the range of the CWIS guns. Which systems can shoot down missiles let alone a much slower and less agile manned aircraft.
Nobody has owned us. We've chosen to take the path of peaceful responses. For NOW....
It depends on the level of classification worked on. At TS level you are right. Down to Secret level the precautions get more lax. A couple years ago I was working in a SCIF and no external devices are allowed for fear of using them to transmit data out. Even though as you noted the facilities are faraday cages and no signal gets in or out.
At the secret level that many operations teams work at the security levels are lower. SECRET and Unclassified networked machines will be found sitting side by side on the same desk. They should have TEMPEST separation but operational needs or desires often result in machines being closer together than they should be.
And of course once you go downrange it's a whole different story. On the FOB I was on in Afghanistan in 08, we worked in a tent, so our classified machines were protected by canvas and a very flimsy plywood door.. And network cable was color coded as per the classification and bundles of red (S) and blue (U) cable ran across the ground in the open between tents.
Having NIPR and SIPR (unclassified and Secret level Classified) computers on the same desk is very common in operations areas. You get to TS and the NIPR access usually goes away.
They need the unclassified access as well as the classified. Precautions are in place to limit air-gapping data between the two networks, but in large part they do rely on simply trusting those we've chosen to trust to work with classified information. Of course such machines are supposed to be separated to Tempest standards but that often does not happen.
Cell phones are still restricted usually, though secure blackberries are not uncommon among the leadership. In reality it's turned out those we entrust with our classified information are usually more trustworthy than previously thought. But then that comes from having greater time separation from the days of a drafted military versus a professional volunteer service. Yes breaches do happen but not that often for the fact that such is not difficult to do.
To answer your question, yes the Army does still use Warrant Officers to fly helo's. I'm not aware of any NCO pilot positions or even training slots for NCO's at the flight school at Ft Rucker.
It's also the most easily recognized and readily accepted currency around the world. Start changing it's appearance drastically and or frequently and that quality will diminish as small businesses around the world won't be as willing to take a currency they don't readily recognize due to its' uniform and long standing look and feel.
It works everywhere because it doesn't change dramatically in look and feel and is universally recognized.
False. At the lowest quality it sucks on a large HD screen but even one step up, it looks okay on my 42 inch HD screen. For larger screens that level too may get a little blocky with digital artifacts on the image at times, but it's far better than the show constantly having to pause to buffer.
Did you go to your Netflix account and adjust the vid quality. I ran Netflix just fine over a rather slow wireless isp for a while. Had to lower the screen resolution but it worked fine. Once I moved to a better broadband provider I increased the resolution.
Well to be honest the entire series was really lame and struggling along. Then Lucas woke up and pulled off probably the greatest sequel ever with Episode IV A New Hope. The most amazing aspect of it was how he jumped back through time to release it years before any of the others.
Nope, but if the protestors have surrounded the police, and refuse to obey lawful orders to clear the main thru-way of campus, then yes.
Those students were given every opportunity to move and NOT be sprayed. The officers weren't trying to arrest them, or beat them, just return to their vehicles after realizing that they would not be able to safely remove the Occupy encampment. But the student surrounded and trapped them, Once you block their route of egress it is no longer peaceful. You may not be attacking them but you have taken them prisoner unless they act. As they did.
The students had ample time to move, right up until the trigger was pulled. And hat was after repeated requests and an explanation of what was about to happen did the students not move. The officers showed extreme restraint in their actions. They could have sprayed the pepper much sooner with less warning and still been justified. Being a protester doesn't give you the right to trap the police. Protest all you want, but accept the risks.
Why wouldn't they? Many are self contained communities of several thousand resident students, needing a full time dedicated police presence, that the neighboring/host city may not be able to staff sufficiently.
The police action was an assignment to remove an Occupy camp. The moved in as ordered. The students then sat and blocked their route back to their vehicles and as the officers asked the sitting students to move, more sat down surrounding the officers. The Officers had no clear path to leave by. They asked and ordered the students to move, they did not. The officers showed the students the pepper spray and told them what would happen if they did not move. The students had every opportunity to move. They could have stood and let the officers pass and then continued their idiotic protests.
The students also had the police officers surrounded, had been asked and ordered to move. Had been shown the pepper spray and told what would happen if they did not move to allow the police officers through. The students were blocking a main thoroughfare of the campus, and preventing the officers from doing their jobs, heck the officers were surrounded they were even being prevented from leaving the scene.
In short the students had every chance to avoid it. They deserved what they got. The School needs to grow a pair and back their officers who acted appropriately. They could have pulled out their billy clubs and started beating on the students.
It's not the pro gun people screaming militia. It's those trying to undermine the fact that the 2A guarantees a right of the people, by claiming that it only refers to the Militia. In which case the age limit you mention would have basis. It's those who want to be able to restrict ownership of firearms that try to cite the militia clause, not those standing in defense of the right to keep and bear arms.
But the 2A is protecting the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The Amendment does give a justification that a big portion of the reason for this protection is because you can't have a functional militia if the citizenry is disarmed or heavily restricted in the arms it can own. But the right is reserved to the people, not members of the Militia.
Until the next "generation" is given a catchy name they get the blame. The Millenials are the current targets, a decade ago it was Gen Y, the decade before that it was Gen X. The complaints don't change (Lazy, thoughtless, self absorbed, going to destroy civilization as we know it, etc...) just the name applied to the current 20 something group of adults exiting college and entering the workforce.
Very flawed understanding of Original Classification Authority: Yes she can declare anything classified by her dept as unclassified, but she has to document the declassification. Unless she can provide the declassification/downgrade records the information was not correctly declassified. She can't declassify without telling anyone because that leaves the information still classified. It must be documented so that someone else then caught with the info can then prove that the data was declassified. OCA isn't a license to do whatever you want, it still has strict procedures and requirements.
Because that effort already failed with browser encryption export restrictions. For years it was illegal to export browsers capable of encrypting data at higher than 40bit encryption. But that ban totally failed. The internet ignored it and the US standard 128 bit browsers (Netscape and IE) were widely used outside the US.
Fighting encryption is a losing battle. At most they will put US citizens' data at greater risk by limiting what we can use while the rest of the world pushes forward into better security.
Why? These aren't expected to fly miles behind enemy lines. They are vision extenders for troops on the ground. If the enemy is able to take over one, then they just probe forward as they did before drones and kill the enemy. But most likely the enemy are not going to be worrying about taking over such drones, just shooting them down. And if electronic countermeasures are suspected, they can probably be programed to a basic flight path up out and back with no external direction commands received.
Slashdot Mirror
So any company that does any contract work for the government is a place to avoid then. Many companies test because they are required to by law because they do business with the Government.
You call it a strawman yet give no evidence to refute it as such.
Or more likely it's all designed to push sales of newer iPhones. They've said repeatedly that this only works on older devices. So Apple recruited the FBI to increase sales by scaring people in to rushing out and updating older but still fully functional devices. This was it doesn't look like an ad campaign, and they get tons of global Airtime pushing the name of Apple as being secure. Especially if you have a device newer and better than the 5c.
It's all Marketing.
(yes I am joking. I hope.)
I thought they were talking about having to fence in a piece of dust. Which is odd indeed.
Your definition of owned is off, way off.
Just because we have ROE in place to avoid international incidents with intentionally provocative nations does not mean we are owned. You can be sure those Russkies were lit up with the air defense systems and had they tried to act they would have been shot down in a heartbeat.
Ditto with the Iranians shooting rockets, the flight paths were analyzed and determined to be intentional misses and so we did not respond. Again to avoid creating an international incident possibly leading to more conflict and direct combat. They spoofed the GPS signals to bring UAV down in their territory.
North Korea is just rattling it's sabers, and we did respond by conducting our regularly scheduled joint training exercise with the ROK forces.
The A-10 has been out of production for years. The issue is that the Air force wants to retire it, but nobody has owned an A-10 it rules the close air support realm.
And the F-22 was intentionally limited in production to 122 aircraft.
Exactly what about showing restraint equals being owned? The closest to being owned is the Russian fly-byes and the Iranians spoofing the UAV. The UAV incident was due to our hubris in not encrypting the data stream letting the Iranians realize the craft was flying and giving them the opportunity to try to spoof it. The Russians well those very brave pilots have to know that come Jan 20 of next year the ROE may change substantially. Or if the captain of the ship begins to think that the aircraft is actually a threat it will be smashed and hard. At the range it flew by it's not only well inside the missile envelope but also inside the range of the CWIS guns. Which systems can shoot down missiles let alone a much slower and less agile manned aircraft.
Nobody has owned us. We've chosen to take the path of peaceful responses. For NOW....
It depends on the level of classification worked on. At TS level you are right. Down to Secret level the precautions get more lax. A couple years ago I was working in a SCIF and no external devices are allowed for fear of using them to transmit data out. Even though as you noted the facilities are faraday cages and no signal gets in or out.
At the secret level that many operations teams work at the security levels are lower. SECRET and Unclassified networked machines will be found sitting side by side on the same desk. They should have TEMPEST separation but operational needs or desires often result in machines being closer together than they should be.
And of course once you go downrange it's a whole different story. On the FOB I was on in Afghanistan in 08, we worked in a tent, so our classified machines were protected by canvas and a very flimsy plywood door.. And network cable was color coded as per the classification and bundles of red (S) and blue (U) cable ran across the ground in the open between tents.
Having NIPR and SIPR (unclassified and Secret level Classified) computers on the same desk is very common in operations areas. You get to TS and the NIPR access usually goes away.
They need the unclassified access as well as the classified. Precautions are in place to limit air-gapping data between the two networks, but in large part they do rely on simply trusting those we've chosen to trust to work with classified information. Of course such machines are supposed to be separated to Tempest standards but that often does not happen.
Cell phones are still restricted usually, though secure blackberries are not uncommon among the leadership. In reality it's turned out those we entrust with our classified information are usually more trustworthy than previously thought. But then that comes from having greater time separation from the days of a drafted military versus a professional volunteer service. Yes breaches do happen but not that often for the fact that such is not difficult to do.
To answer your question, yes the Army does still use Warrant Officers to fly helo's. I'm not aware of any NCO pilot positions or even training slots for NCO's at the flight school at Ft Rucker.
It's also the most easily recognized and readily accepted currency around the world. Start changing it's appearance drastically and or frequently and that quality will diminish as small businesses around the world won't be as willing to take a currency they don't readily recognize due to its' uniform and long standing look and feel.
It works everywhere because it doesn't change dramatically in look and feel and is universally recognized.
Melanin enhanced?
Not a Dupe, closely related, so close this post actually cited the one you did. But two different yet closely related articles.
False. At the lowest quality it sucks on a large HD screen but even one step up, it looks okay on my 42 inch HD screen. For larger screens that level too may get a little blocky with digital artifacts on the image at times, but it's far better than the show constantly having to pause to buffer.
Did you go to your Netflix account and adjust the vid quality. I ran Netflix just fine over a rather slow wireless isp for a while. Had to lower the screen resolution but it worked fine. Once I moved to a better broadband provider I increased the resolution.
Well to be honest the entire series was really lame and struggling along. Then Lucas woke up and pulled off probably the greatest sequel ever with Episode IV A New Hope. The most amazing aspect of it was how he jumped back through time to release it years before any of the others.
I'd bet you could even create a line of stores, Theme parks and even a movie about said blocks. That would be Awesome!
Make up context much. The Alabama protestors did not surround the police. In fact they were marching up the road. And pepper is not dogs.
Nope, but if the protestors have surrounded the police, and refuse to obey lawful orders to clear the main thru-way of campus, then yes.
Those students were given every opportunity to move and NOT be sprayed. The officers weren't trying to arrest them, or beat them, just return to their vehicles after realizing that they would not be able to safely remove the Occupy encampment. But the student surrounded and trapped them, Once you block their route of egress it is no longer peaceful. You may not be attacking them but you have taken them prisoner unless they act. As they did.
The students had ample time to move, right up until the trigger was pulled. And hat was after repeated requests and an explanation of what was about to happen did the students not move. The officers showed extreme restraint in their actions. They could have sprayed the pepper much sooner with less warning and still been justified. Being a protester doesn't give you the right to trap the police. Protest all you want, but accept the risks.
Why wouldn't they? Many are self contained communities of several thousand resident students, needing a full time dedicated police presence, that the neighboring/host city may not be able to staff sufficiently.
The police action was an assignment to remove an Occupy camp. The moved in as ordered. The students then sat and blocked their route back to their vehicles and as the officers asked the sitting students to move, more sat down surrounding the officers. The Officers had no clear path to leave by. They asked and ordered the students to move, they did not. The officers showed the students the pepper spray and told them what would happen if they did not move. The students had every opportunity to move. They could have stood and let the officers pass and then continued their idiotic protests.
The students also had the police officers surrounded, had been asked and ordered to move. Had been shown the pepper spray and told what would happen if they did not move to allow the police officers through. The students were blocking a main thoroughfare of the campus, and preventing the officers from doing their jobs, heck the officers were surrounded they were even being prevented from leaving the scene.
In short the students had every chance to avoid it. They deserved what they got. The School needs to grow a pair and back their officers who acted appropriately. They could have pulled out their billy clubs and started beating on the students.
Yes I back the actions of those officers.
It's not the pro gun people screaming militia. It's those trying to undermine the fact that the 2A guarantees a right of the people, by claiming that it only refers to the Militia. In which case the age limit you mention would have basis. It's those who want to be able to restrict ownership of firearms that try to cite the militia clause, not those standing in defense of the right to keep and bear arms.
But the 2A is protecting the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The Amendment does give a justification that a big portion of the reason for this protection is because you can't have a functional militia if the citizenry is disarmed or heavily restricted in the arms it can own. But the right is reserved to the people, not members of the Militia.
Until the next "generation" is given a catchy name they get the blame. The Millenials are the current targets, a decade ago it was Gen Y, the decade before that it was Gen X. The complaints don't change (Lazy, thoughtless, self absorbed, going to destroy civilization as we know it, etc...) just the name applied to the current 20 something group of adults exiting college and entering the workforce.
Very flawed understanding of Original Classification Authority: Yes she can declare anything classified by her dept as unclassified, but she has to document the declassification. Unless she can provide the declassification/downgrade records the information was not correctly declassified. She can't declassify without telling anyone because that leaves the information still classified. It must be documented so that someone else then caught with the info can then prove that the data was declassified. OCA isn't a license to do whatever you want, it still has strict procedures and requirements.
Because that effort already failed with browser encryption export restrictions. For years it was illegal to export browsers capable of encrypting data at higher than 40bit encryption. But that ban totally failed. The internet ignored it and the US standard 128 bit browsers (Netscape and IE) were widely used outside the US.
Fighting encryption is a losing battle. At most they will put US citizens' data at greater risk by limiting what we can use while the rest of the world pushes forward into better security.
Why? These aren't expected to fly miles behind enemy lines. They are vision extenders for troops on the ground. If the enemy is able to take over one, then they just probe forward as they did before drones and kill the enemy. But most likely the enemy are not going to be worrying about taking over such drones, just shooting them down. And if electronic countermeasures are suspected, they can probably be programed to a basic flight path up out and back with no external direction commands received.