True, true. I haven't checked in a few years but I know it used to be with Sprint that if you purchased your own phone you could opt for a contract free plan for only $10 more a month. I didn't see too many folks take that option, pay more for less services just so you could quit at any time. (many of the add-ons required a new 2 year contract even if you didn't get anything of monetary value (a new phone) for agreeing to pay them more money each month.
But what is the factual problem with his post? It's simply pointing out that just because someone says something doesn't make them actually knowledgeable experts on the ongoing situation. You don't like the person, fine, but your diatribe ignores the whole point of his post. Who is the person being quoted what is the basis of his knowledge and why should we care what he says?
Spot on: I mean the Constitution Class starship I served on during my stint in the Space Service is nothing like the totally unrealistic creation that Roddenberry hack came up with. Two Warp Nacelles? Come on, everybody knows that to achieve anything more than warp two you have to have at least six of them.
And as I mentioned in another post, that Laforge dude was no Chief Engineer. I mean you never, and I mean NEVER reverse the polarity of a tachyon flow and re-route it through your main deflector. Even a line cook knows that will only result in frying the main deflector leaving you stuck in space without a deflector to protect against space debris and you also run a very significant risk of breaching containment on the anti-matter. Simply put, it's worse than if one of the Ghostbusters Inc. Buster Teams(TM) were to cross the streams of their Proton Accelerator packs and we all know that short of the return of Gozer, that's just not a good idea.
If you're going to bring Star Trek TV episodes into this, wasn't Geordi able to save the day on a weekly basis by reversing the polarity of something and re-routing it through the main deflector? Oh and young Wesley Crusher seemed fond of reversing the polarity of just about everything he touched.
Reply all is great when organizing some family activity. Rather than make sure you remembered to include everyone in your reply, you just hit reply all and everybody gets the email. There is a reason Reply all exists. Perhaps the real issue isn't reply all but rather people doing massive corporate emails using cc: instead of bcc: which prevents the reply all fiasco. But then again wasn't there a/. article not that long ago claiming that bcc: was dead and useless? Death of BCC
So first we have a discussion about how bcc is dead and useless, and now we have a discussion about the supposed risks of "reply all," which risks would be substantially reduced through the use of bcc.
As your correction is incorrect, you may not correct us. The decision to use "A" versus "AN" is based on the following sound not the following letter. Utopia begins the consonant "Y" or "yuh" sound, not the vowel sound which would be "uh" Thus Utah is indeed "A Utopia" rather than "An Utopia."
No, they remain virgins because you only get to hang out with them, you don't get to have sex with them. After all they would then no longer be virgins. And there are only 72 of them so all the Martyrs get to share the same, non-giving any, eternal virgins. Paradise indeed.:)
How public facebook posts are is irrelevant. The problem is that to obtain the post the Principal required the student to login to her account, thus requiring the student to incriminate herself. The principal could have accessed that posting via any other facebook account with little or no problem, but in requiring the student to login the Principal violated the 4th and 5th amendment rights of the student. The student was forced to self-incriminate by accessing her personal papers (i.e. her login password). All without a warrant.
And what facebook MAY change the privacy settings to mean in the unknown future is also irrelevant. As it currently stands a post that is limited as to who can see it is private, especially if the suspect is to be forced to login to access it. You are correct that it really isn't all that private in that if the principal had accessed the post through any other voluntary allowed facebook login it would be fine. But by requiring the suspect to access the post, the Principal overstepped the law.
But in order to obtain the evidence of the suspected crime, the school still has to follow due process, ensuring full protection of the student's rights. Your example is inapplicable because "Pulling a Columbine at the Mall" would be a publicly available incident. Whereas when the principal required the student to login to her own account in order for the Principal to read the posts, it was a blatant violation of the student's right to privacy, and right against self incrimination.
Or don't we care about the 4th and 5th amendments anymore?
But as the Principal was acting in her position. She was thus acting as an agent of the government, thus to require the student to login to show her the posts, a warrant is required. If the Principal could login to her own account or someone else voluntarily logged in and showed her the posts all would have been okay, but the caselaw is clear here, requiring the student to log into her own account to access the posts was a violation of the girl's right against self incrimination.
how many pregnant women go to rock concerts or football games, those are crowded physical venues even if your just there to watch,
Plenty, movement even in crowds only becomes difficult in the last few weeks, and women can be pregnant for weeks and even months before they realize they are pregnant.
Actually that depends on how and if the company has monitoring disclaimers. If the company's disclaimer banners and AUP are not specific to the employer having access to your workspace and/or email you can assume an REP. As to the locker, if you are allowed to place your own lock on the locker you do indeed have an REP. You only lose the REP if and when your work space is commonly open and accessible to your fellow workers and supervisors. Thus your employer cannot just let law enforcement search your work space willy nilly. However as the 4th amendment applies to government agents your employer can search in the course of their normal managerial duties. But they cannot just let the police come in and search without a warrant.
My reference materials on this are at work or I'd cite the relevant case law. But how it works is. If your employer finds evidence of wrong doing they can search further and choose to pass the evidence to law enforcement. But law enforcement cannot just walk in and ask the employer to search for such evidence without a warrant supported by probable cause. So your employer can search your stuff on their own, but lacking probable cause and a warrant the employer cannot (and most likely would not) simply allow the police to search or conduct searches on behalf of the police.
And if the employer provides you with an ability to secure your possessions with-in the work place, they cannot search without your consent. Now in theory the employer can coerce you to open the container (open it or your fired and security clears and catalogs your stuff while you wait out in the lobby), but that again cannot be done at the behest of the police. Of course what idiot keeps evidence of wrong doing at work? Well other than the idiots that have established the case law. Such as Dr Ortega in Connor V Ortega which established aspects of how the law is implemented.
Also the Warshak v US ruling in Dec of 2010 changed things a bit and all the wrinkles need to be worked out, or it could be overturned or altered when/if it's heard by the Supreme court. The ruling found that as email accounts are protected by passwords, users do indeed have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Again it needs to work through the court system a bit more, but as a base rule, that means law enforcement cannot pull your email without a warrant. The employer may be able to in the course of normal system monitoring and management, but they cannot go after email at the request of law enforcement without a warrant.
Stay tuned though because this area of case law is rapidly evolving and changes every year.
Assange would not face the death penalty anyway. He was not caught in a US facility in the act of espionage. And not being a US Citizen he can't be charged with Treason. Simply of accepting and then refusing to return our Classified documents. Actually I'm not sure exactly what charges we can apply, but nothing capitol fits.
Further neither of them are in any risk of going to Gitmo. Once convicted under the UCMJ Manning will end up at Leavenworth. Assange if convicted of anything would spend his time at some Federal Penitentiary. Both have rights and protections that unlawful combatants do not. Before you go making wild, unfounded accusations try actually looking into how our legal system works.
I'm disappointed they took death off the board so quickly, but then again Manning still faces Federal Treason charges once the military justice system is finished with him. When you break the law in the military you can and usually will face double jeopardy.
I say this because while every patch and update to IE resets the search box to Bing as default, it only takes seconds to change back. I too work for the Government, and am forced to use IE but I do have access privileges sufficient to change it, once I've discovered an update has switched it back to Bing.
Actually I do believe you in the setting being locked in. Sysadmins are notorious for implementing such strict settings.
Has anyone submitted a request for permission to change the setting? I doubt it is actually due to any contractual agreement, (if it was Google and the other search engines would scream about it in court, as the government shouldn't be seen favoring a single service provider.) but rather they just locked in the default setting because they don't trust the users with anything.
Monopoly:
1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Compare duopoly, oligopoly.
2. an exclusive privilege to carry on a business, traffic, or service, granted by a government.
3. the exclusive possession or control of something.
4. something that is the subject of such control, as a commodity or service.
5. a company or group that has such control.
6. the market condition that exists when there is only one seller.
(emphasis added by me)
Not a monopoly at all, just a majority share due to earned popularity. Popularity earned by performance far in excess of the competition. If I decide I'm tired of Google, I can at no cost and with no limitations switch to yahoo, or Bing or one of the other engines out there. There is no cost to the customer, there are no restrictions in choosing to use other options that are equally free. There is no exclusive privilege granted to Google by any government entity, they don't control the search engine market, They just dominate due to excellent service, yet options are freely available. By definition, Google does not hold a monopoly.
Guess we need to start doing a few Yahoo or Altavista searches each month to help them push Bing back into it's place.
Not only is it the default, but whenever a update or significant patch is pushed out at work (the only place I use IE and then only because I have no choice), the default search engine used by the search bar gets magically switched back to Bing, resulting in at least a couple searches a month in bing. That alone may account for a small but still significant portion of the 4.37% of searches Bing is getting.
Yes, you'll find people who can speak English, because it is the most commonly used language for business. And is thus widely taught in schools around the world as a required class. But get off the beaten path and the commonality of English drops. In Western Europe English is widely spoken, outside Western Europe it's not nearly so common.
So the rest of the world can teach their students two languages, the native language and English as a second language and be able to cover a majority of visitors (the commonality of English as the second language taught adds to this effect) . For the US the problem works the other way, We learn English natively and then require all our students to learn _______ as a second language to cover a majority of visitors? It's not an equal equation.
Most high schools in this country teach three common foreign languages, Spanish, French and German, a few other languages are starting to creep in but the majority of HS grads have at most one year of one of those three languages. And if we are lucky they get another year in college, allowing them to effectively ask for directions to a hospital and order a sandwich in the cafeteria, but not much more. So the original suggestion stands. If your going to live in a monolingual nation, one that happens to speak the most widely spoken and studied language in the world, you should consider learning the language.
This was all over the news yesterday. CNN was running the story first but I saw it on Yahoo and a local news site as well. The only time I've ever seen CNN slashdotted was on 9/11.
So the Governor is personally handling IT management at the capitol? Or is it merely a case of standard whitelisting policies as implemented by a software firewall ap?
There are many sites that I cannot get to at work that make no sense, Often they are not intentionally blocked, just caught and blocked by not being on the webfilter's whitelist.
Humans are weak at finding efficient paths? I'd argue just the opposite. We are naturally very good at picking accurate paths. Humans learn the traffic patterns, they know times of day, week and year to use an alternate route due to traffic patterns, holidays and special events. They know to pick an alternate because the radio just said the road was closed for emergency repairs, or due to an accident or weather. A Human learns the streets of his/her town and knows the short cuts off the main routes. I'll admit that we are also at getting into ruts driving the "easiest" route which may not actually be the most efficient, but when we try, we are very good at sorting the variables and choosing an efficient route.
A GPS usually sticks to the primary traffic routes. And when it doesn't it picks weird routes that don't work. They register dirt paths as roads more viable than nice paved roads. They fail to account for construction closures and so on. Which is why truly driver-less cars are still a ways off.
Anyone who blindly follows his GPS is a fool. I've yet to use a GPS navigation system that could accurately pick a viable and efficient route on a consistent basis. The maps are always outdated, and cost too much to keep updating frequently enough.
Slashdot Mirror
True, true. I haven't checked in a few years but I know it used to be with Sprint that if you purchased your own phone you could opt for a contract free plan for only $10 more a month. I didn't see too many folks take that option, pay more for less services just so you could quit at any time. (many of the add-ons required a new 2 year contract even if you didn't get anything of monetary value (a new phone) for agreeing to pay them more money each month.
Don't forget: 1b: Covered bike paths in all cities prone to substantial snow-fall.
But what is the factual problem with his post? It's simply pointing out that just because someone says something doesn't make them actually knowledgeable experts on the ongoing situation. You don't like the person, fine, but your diatribe ignores the whole point of his post. Who is the person being quoted what is the basis of his knowledge and why should we care what he says?
Spot on: I mean the Constitution Class starship I served on during my stint in the Space Service is nothing like the totally unrealistic creation that Roddenberry hack came up with. Two Warp Nacelles? Come on, everybody knows that to achieve anything more than warp two you have to have at least six of them.
And as I mentioned in another post, that Laforge dude was no Chief Engineer. I mean you never, and I mean NEVER reverse the polarity of a tachyon flow and re-route it through your main deflector. Even a line cook knows that will only result in frying the main deflector leaving you stuck in space without a deflector to protect against space debris and you also run a very significant risk of breaching containment on the anti-matter. Simply put, it's worse than if one of the Ghostbusters Inc. Buster Teams(TM) were to cross the streams of their Proton Accelerator packs and we all know that short of the return of Gozer, that's just not a good idea.
Sorry, Ford Motor Corp claims prior art. Evidence is the Pinto.
If you're going to bring Star Trek TV episodes into this, wasn't Geordi able to save the day on a weekly basis by reversing the polarity of something and re-routing it through the main deflector? Oh and young Wesley Crusher seemed fond of reversing the polarity of just about everything he touched.
Maybe the 40 miles between the Great Salt Lake and the location of the NSA facility.
Reply all is great when organizing some family activity. Rather than make sure you remembered to include everyone in your reply, you just hit reply all and everybody gets the email. There is a reason Reply all exists. Perhaps the real issue isn't reply all but rather people doing massive corporate emails using cc: instead of bcc: which prevents the reply all fiasco. But then again wasn't there a /. article not that long ago claiming that bcc: was dead and useless? Death of BCC
So first we have a discussion about how bcc is dead and useless, and now we have a discussion about the supposed risks of "reply all," which risks would be substantially reduced through the use of bcc.
As your correction is incorrect, you may not correct us. The decision to use "A" versus "AN" is based on the following sound not the following letter. Utopia begins the consonant "Y" or "yuh" sound, not the vowel sound which would be "uh" Thus Utah is indeed "A Utopia" rather than "An Utopia."
No, they remain virgins because you only get to hang out with them, you don't get to have sex with them. After all they would then no longer be virgins. And there are only 72 of them so all the Martyrs get to share the same, non-giving any, eternal virgins. Paradise indeed. :)
How public facebook posts are is irrelevant. The problem is that to obtain the post the Principal required the student to login to her account, thus requiring the student to incriminate herself. The principal could have accessed that posting via any other facebook account with little or no problem, but in requiring the student to login the Principal violated the 4th and 5th amendment rights of the student. The student was forced to self-incriminate by accessing her personal papers (i.e. her login password). All without a warrant.
And what facebook MAY change the privacy settings to mean in the unknown future is also irrelevant. As it currently stands a post that is limited as to who can see it is private, especially if the suspect is to be forced to login to access it. You are correct that it really isn't all that private in that if the principal had accessed the post through any other voluntary allowed facebook login it would be fine. But by requiring the suspect to access the post, the Principal overstepped the law.
But in order to obtain the evidence of the suspected crime, the school still has to follow due process, ensuring full protection of the student's rights. Your example is inapplicable because "Pulling a Columbine at the Mall" would be a publicly available incident. Whereas when the principal required the student to login to her own account in order for the Principal to read the posts, it was a blatant violation of the student's right to privacy, and right against self incrimination.
Or don't we care about the 4th and 5th amendments anymore?
But as the Principal was acting in her position. She was thus acting as an agent of the government, thus to require the student to login to show her the posts, a warrant is required. If the Principal could login to her own account or someone else voluntarily logged in and showed her the posts all would have been okay, but the caselaw is clear here, requiring the student to log into her own account to access the posts was a violation of the girl's right against self incrimination.
how many pregnant women go to rock concerts or football games, those are crowded physical venues even if your just there to watch,
Plenty, movement even in crowds only becomes difficult in the last few weeks, and women can be pregnant for weeks and even months before they realize they are pregnant.
Actually that depends on how and if the company has monitoring disclaimers. If the company's disclaimer banners and AUP are not specific to the employer having access to your workspace and/or email you can assume an REP. As to the locker, if you are allowed to place your own lock on the locker you do indeed have an REP. You only lose the REP if and when your work space is commonly open and accessible to your fellow workers and supervisors. Thus your employer cannot just let law enforcement search your work space willy nilly. However as the 4th amendment applies to government agents your employer can search in the course of their normal managerial duties. But they cannot just let the police come in and search without a warrant.
My reference materials on this are at work or I'd cite the relevant case law. But how it works is. If your employer finds evidence of wrong doing they can search further and choose to pass the evidence to law enforcement. But law enforcement cannot just walk in and ask the employer to search for such evidence without a warrant supported by probable cause. So your employer can search your stuff on their own, but lacking probable cause and a warrant the employer cannot (and most likely would not) simply allow the police to search or conduct searches on behalf of the police.
And if the employer provides you with an ability to secure your possessions with-in the work place, they cannot search without your consent. Now in theory the employer can coerce you to open the container (open it or your fired and security clears and catalogs your stuff while you wait out in the lobby), but that again cannot be done at the behest of the police. Of course what idiot keeps evidence of wrong doing at work? Well other than the idiots that have established the case law. Such as Dr Ortega in Connor V Ortega which established aspects of how the law is implemented.
Also the Warshak v US ruling in Dec of 2010 changed things a bit and all the wrinkles need to be worked out, or it could be overturned or altered when/if it's heard by the Supreme court. The ruling found that as email accounts are protected by passwords, users do indeed have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Again it needs to work through the court system a bit more, but as a base rule, that means law enforcement cannot pull your email without a warrant. The employer may be able to in the course of normal system monitoring and management, but they cannot go after email at the request of law enforcement without a warrant.
Stay tuned though because this area of case law is rapidly evolving and changes every year.
Assange would not face the death penalty anyway. He was not caught in a US facility in the act of espionage. And not being a US Citizen he can't be charged with Treason. Simply of accepting and then refusing to return our Classified documents. Actually I'm not sure exactly what charges we can apply, but nothing capitol fits. Further neither of them are in any risk of going to Gitmo. Once convicted under the UCMJ Manning will end up at Leavenworth. Assange if convicted of anything would spend his time at some Federal Penitentiary. Both have rights and protections that unlawful combatants do not. Before you go making wild, unfounded accusations try actually looking into how our legal system works. I'm disappointed they took death off the board so quickly, but then again Manning still faces Federal Treason charges once the military justice system is finished with him. When you break the law in the military you can and usually will face double jeopardy.
Are you sure they can't change?
I say this because while every patch and update to IE resets the search box to Bing as default, it only takes seconds to change back. I too work for the Government, and am forced to use IE but I do have access privileges sufficient to change it, once I've discovered an update has switched it back to Bing.
Actually I do believe you in the setting being locked in. Sysadmins are notorious for implementing such strict settings.
Has anyone submitted a request for permission to change the setting? I doubt it is actually due to any contractual agreement, (if it was Google and the other search engines would scream about it in court, as the government shouldn't be seen favoring a single service provider.) but rather they just locked in the default setting because they don't trust the users with anything.
Monopoly:
1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Compare duopoly, oligopoly.
2. an exclusive privilege to carry on a business, traffic, or service, granted by a government.
3. the exclusive possession or control of something.
4. something that is the subject of such control, as a commodity or service.
5. a company or group that has such control.
6. the market condition that exists when there is only one seller.
(emphasis added by me)
Not a monopoly at all, just a majority share due to earned popularity. Popularity earned by performance far in excess of the competition. If I decide I'm tired of Google, I can at no cost and with no limitations switch to yahoo, or Bing or one of the other engines out there. There is no cost to the customer, there are no restrictions in choosing to use other options that are equally free. There is no exclusive privilege granted to Google by any government entity, they don't control the search engine market, They just dominate due to excellent service, yet options are freely available. By definition, Google does not hold a monopoly.
Guess we need to start doing a few Yahoo or Altavista searches each month to help them push Bing back into it's place.
Not only is it the default, but whenever a update or significant patch is pushed out at work (the only place I use IE and then only because I have no choice), the default search engine used by the search bar gets magically switched back to Bing, resulting in at least a couple searches a month in bing. That alone may account for a small but still significant portion of the 4.37% of searches Bing is getting.
Yes, you'll find people who can speak English, because it is the most commonly used language for business. And is thus widely taught in schools around the world as a required class. But get off the beaten path and the commonality of English drops. In Western Europe English is widely spoken, outside Western Europe it's not nearly so common.
So the rest of the world can teach their students two languages, the native language and English as a second language and be able to cover a majority of visitors (the commonality of English as the second language taught adds to this effect) . For the US the problem works the other way, We learn English natively and then require all our students to learn _______ as a second language to cover a majority of visitors? It's not an equal equation.
Most high schools in this country teach three common foreign languages, Spanish, French and German, a few other languages are starting to creep in but the majority of HS grads have at most one year of one of those three languages. And if we are lucky they get another year in college, allowing them to effectively ask for directions to a hospital and order a sandwich in the cafeteria, but not much more. So the original suggestion stands. If your going to live in a monolingual nation, one that happens to speak the most widely spoken and studied language in the world, you should consider learning the language.
Yes, but can your "Cell Phone" thingie do all that and cost the hospital 12-18k pop?
God call doc. Nothing like a new massively overpriced gadget to drive health care costs up even more.
Try in the System32 folder, it seems everything else of import is found there. Please share the location when you do find this file.
This was all over the news yesterday. CNN was running the story first but I saw it on Yahoo and a local news site as well. The only time I've ever seen CNN slashdotted was on 9/11.
So the Governor is personally handling IT management at the capitol? Or is it merely a case of standard whitelisting policies as implemented by a software firewall ap?
There are many sites that I cannot get to at work that make no sense, Often they are not intentionally blocked, just caught and blocked by not being on the webfilter's whitelist.
Humans are weak at finding efficient paths? I'd argue just the opposite. We are naturally very good at picking accurate paths. Humans learn the traffic patterns, they know times of day, week and year to use an alternate route due to traffic patterns, holidays and special events. They know to pick an alternate because the radio just said the road was closed for emergency repairs, or due to an accident or weather. A Human learns the streets of his/her town and knows the short cuts off the main routes. I'll admit that we are also at getting into ruts driving the "easiest" route which may not actually be the most efficient, but when we try, we are very good at sorting the variables and choosing an efficient route.
A GPS usually sticks to the primary traffic routes. And when it doesn't it picks weird routes that don't work. They register dirt paths as roads more viable than nice paved roads. They fail to account for construction closures and so on. Which is why truly driver-less cars are still a ways off.
Anyone who blindly follows his GPS is a fool. I've yet to use a GPS navigation system that could accurately pick a viable and efficient route on a consistent basis. The maps are always outdated, and cost too much to keep updating frequently enough.