I'm always puzzled by the number of people on Slashdot who seem to root for China and against the US.
There's a lot of anti-US sentiment on Slashdot, some of it quite justified. There's also a lot of shills, including Chinese government shills. Figuring out which is which is an exercise for the student.
(Obvious shills are obvious, but I'd bet there are non-obvious ones as well. The puzzling thing is that whoever is paying the shills seem to think slashdot matters... or perhaps they just use it for practice).
Horsepuckey. I **AM** a pro, and the only time we use cell phone connections is for remote sites where there's no reasonable wiring alternatives and there's no line-of-sight for microwave links.
Maybe commercial. For residential, cellular backup is certainly used; I wrote the software for a cellular backup device in a home security system.
The best one was a question/statement: "Do you have a CISSP or a TS/SCI clearance? If not, GTFO. We don't hire garbage who can't prove themselves."
ROTFL. Unless it was a job that required a clearance, it's none of their fucking business whether anyone holds one. I think if I held such a clearance and someone on a non-clearance-required job asked about it, I might feel compelled to report them. Of course it's not actually illegal to ask, but it might get them some undesired attention from counterintelligence agents.
You mean like pointless, arbitrary rules against 'profanity'?
The idea is to enforce obedience; the content of the fucking rules is almost irrelevant. Not quite, though; it's necessary for them to be strict enough that many students wouldn't want to follow them, or it won't have the proper purpose of instilling discipline and respect for arbitrary authority.
It's not that the cops are slow to learn. It's that the lesson they're being taught is they can do whatever the fuck they want, and the worst possible outcome for them is a paid vacation. The most likely outcome is they get away with it clean and their victim is punished. You want the cops to sit up and take notice? Judges need to start having them taken out back of the courtroom and summarily executed for pulling this shit. Won't happen, because most judges (and juries) are on the side of the cops no mater what.
This is why half the recent college grads I've been interviewing lately have unreasonable expectations. They've been raised in a fantasy land that doesn't exist in the real world.
Well, that and the fact that with the economy being the way it's been since they entered college, "reasonable expectations" are basically ONE bowl of gruel for a hard day's work.
We need an information based way of considering these things. A measurement of how much total distraction a car is allowed to give the driver. Then we can use that metric to allow or disallow various things.
Any metric can be gamed. And when the law is at stake, they all will be.
What we need is for Congress to declare that vehicles are "safe enough" and tell the NHTSA they can't write any new regulations. The problem is having done all the easy stuff with the big gains, they've now got nothing to do so they go looking for harder and harder stuff with smaller and smaller (perhaps nonexistent or even negative) gains.
I had my hands at roughly 9 and 3 when it did; all I got from the airbag were some friction burns on my right arm and a good snort of stuff I'd have rather not breathed.
Trying to specify any particular exact hand position given the variety of people, steering wheels, and driving positions seems pointless.
And performance driving instructors have been advocating push-pull steering (rather than hand-over-hand) for a very long time. Not because of the airbag, but because it provides better control. Whether it makes a difference on the road or in the mall parking lot I doubt.
Libertarians (similar to classical liberals, nothing like modern liberals) are the ones who want to maximize freedom. Libertarianism is the belief that consenting adults should be able to do whatever the hell they want, no matter who disapproves, so long as they don't pose a threat to non-participants. Libertarianism would seriously take off as a political movement if it were possible to get candidates on the ballot for all major elections
Wrong. Most people don't want freedom. They want a maximum of control to avoid bad outcomes. Suggest that something should be legalized that was banned only recently (e.g. riding in a car without a seat belt) and they'll recoil in horror.
Liberty? Forget about it. It has neither constituency nor champion.
A bad actor could rather easily convert the hashes back to email addresses. All he needs is a good source of email addresses (readily available from the dirtbags who supply spammers), which he can then hash and index. Takes some computer resources, that's all.
A good actor need merely not misuse the email addresses in the first place.
When I went to the URL in the article, I got a warning about a "web threat", claiming the site contains malware. Does it really... or are the censorware companies covering for each other?
Not just I - the Supreme Court thinks so too, which is why in this decision, they cited Diehr positively.
The Supreme Court collectively and the justices individually are masters of sophistry.
Allowing unpatentable subject matter to become patentable by combining it with generic hardware amounts to eviscerating the limits on patentable subject matter.
So software isn't patentable, software "running on a computer" or "encoded on storage medium" is patentable. And you think that's something more than mere sophistry.
That said, computer programs are already unpatentable... Valid software patents involve hardware
Oh, give it up. Software patents which involve hardware do so by invoking perfectly generic hardware. The inventive step (if indeed there is one) is in the software, the hardware is a mere formality.
And there's even software patents which invoke the hardware the program is _stored on_, though I believe this particular dodge has been struck down.
Why the hell did they choose to test with penicillin immunity?
It's Monsanto, they're evil. Their first choice was the Ebola virulence sequence, but they didn't think they could pay enough to get that one approved for sale.
Drought. Bad ones too. In my part of NJ, we got a few inches of snow this year, instead of a few feet. The reservoirs are going to be bone-dry, since there's no snow to melt.
Last year, we got way more snow than we usually do. Global warming. This year, way less. Global warming.
Think about what you are saying. There is no way the US could ever launch a nuclear attack on anybody with impunity.
Here's a way:
"Someone" fires an apparently crappy-ass nuclear missile from a submarine in the Persian Gulf. The submarine is pursued and destroyed by the US Navy. It goes off somewhere relatively unimportant in Israel. All signs point to Iran, or so they say, and Israel goes nuclear on Iran.
Yep, obviously the airlines don't have a good reason, they're just making up reasons because they want to piss off their customers.
These are companies which came up with baggage fees that piss off customers AND cause flight delays (because so many people push the limit on carry-ons to avoid the baggage fee). Expecting sensible behavior from them is unwarranted.
God forbid you go without your electronic toys for a few minutes...
I expect cash might be outlawed in the USA in my lifetime.
Cash is convenient, but given an incentive, organized crime will develop a way of doing anonymous transactions. Probably not Tide, though, that sounds like a story picked up from The Onion.
It's no different from going bankrupt, then finding out that you have to declare the portion of any loans you never paid back as "income".
Because that's not actually true. Debt discharged in bankruptcy is not taxable.
Plenty of people got bitten by that when they were foreclosed on
Foreclosures are more complex, but if your home was your only significant asset, or you declared bankruptcy to discharge the residual debt, the cancelled debt likely isn't taxable.
I thought there were two main reasons for this rule---interference, and potential for projectiles.
No, it's just interference. "Potential for projectiles" is an example of the kinds of additional excuses that those in favor of rules for rules sake start to tack on when their original reason starts to wear thin.
Slashdot Mirror
There's a lot of anti-US sentiment on Slashdot, some of it quite justified. There's also a lot of shills, including Chinese government shills. Figuring out which is which is an exercise for the student.
(Obvious shills are obvious, but I'd bet there are non-obvious ones as well. The puzzling thing is that whoever is paying the shills seem to think slashdot matters... or perhaps they just use it for practice).
Maybe commercial. For residential, cellular backup is certainly used; I wrote the software for a cellular backup device in a home security system.
ROTFL. Unless it was a job that required a clearance, it's none of their fucking business whether anyone holds one. I think if I held such a clearance and someone on a non-clearance-required job asked about it, I might feel compelled to report them. Of course it's not actually illegal to ask, but it might get them some undesired attention from counterintelligence agents.
The idea is to enforce obedience; the content of the fucking rules is almost irrelevant. Not quite, though; it's necessary for them to be strict enough that many students wouldn't want to follow them, or it won't have the proper purpose of instilling discipline and respect for arbitrary authority.
Not according to 17 USC 1201(a)(2) and 17 USC 1201(b)(1) it isn't.
It's not that the cops are slow to learn. It's that the lesson they're being taught is they can do whatever the fuck they want, and the worst possible outcome for them is a paid vacation. The most likely outcome is they get away with it clean and their victim is punished. You want the cops to sit up and take notice? Judges need to start having them taken out back of the courtroom and summarily executed for pulling this shit. Won't happen, because most judges (and juries) are on the side of the cops no mater what.
Well, that and the fact that with the economy being the way it's been since they entered college, "reasonable expectations" are basically ONE bowl of gruel for a hard day's work.
Any metric can be gamed. And when the law is at stake, they all will be.
What we need is for Congress to declare that vehicles are "safe enough" and tell the NHTSA they can't write any new regulations. The problem is having done all the easy stuff with the big gains, they've now got nothing to do so they go looking for harder and harder stuff with smaller and smaller (perhaps nonexistent or even negative) gains.
I had my hands at roughly 9 and 3 when it did; all I got from the airbag were some friction burns on my right arm and a good snort of stuff I'd have rather not breathed.
Trying to specify any particular exact hand position given the variety of people, steering wheels, and driving positions seems pointless.
And performance driving instructors have been advocating push-pull steering (rather than hand-over-hand) for a very long time. Not because of the airbag, but because it provides better control. Whether it makes a difference on the road or in the mall parking lot I doubt.
Wrong. Most people don't want freedom. They want a maximum of control to avoid bad outcomes. Suggest that something should be legalized that was banned only recently (e.g. riding in a car without a seat belt) and they'll recoil in horror.
Liberty? Forget about it. It has neither constituency nor champion.
A bad actor could rather easily convert the hashes back to email addresses. All he needs is a good source of email addresses (readily available from the dirtbags who supply spammers), which he can then hash and index. Takes some computer resources, that's all.
A good actor need merely not misuse the email addresses in the first place.
When I went to the URL in the article, I got a warning about a "web threat", claiming the site contains malware. Does it really... or are the censorware companies covering for each other?
The Supreme Court collectively and the justices individually are masters of sophistry.
Allowing unpatentable subject matter to become patentable by combining it with generic hardware amounts to eviscerating the limits on patentable subject matter.
So software isn't patentable, software "running on a computer" or "encoded on storage medium" is patentable. And you think that's something more than mere sophistry.
Oh, give it up. Software patents which involve hardware do so by invoking perfectly generic hardware. The inventive step (if indeed there is one) is in the software, the hardware is a mere formality.
And there's even software patents which invoke the hardware the program is _stored on_, though I believe this particular dodge has been struck down.
It's Monsanto, they're evil. Their first choice was the Ebola virulence sequence, but they didn't think they could pay enough to get that one approved for sale.
Last year, we got way more snow than we usually do. Global warming. This year, way less. Global warming.
Here's a way:
"Someone" fires an apparently crappy-ass nuclear missile from a submarine in the Persian Gulf. The submarine is pursued and destroyed by the US Navy. It goes off somewhere relatively unimportant in Israel. All signs point to Iran, or so they say, and Israel goes nuclear on Iran.
Only thing is, the original sub was CIA.
Well, the Illinois primary was today, so the people certainly got their choice. At least the dead ones did.
These are companies which came up with baggage fees that piss off customers AND cause flight delays (because so many people push the limit on carry-ons to avoid the baggage fee). Expecting sensible behavior from them is unwarranted.
Do you really think that's an argument?
Cash is convenient, but given an incentive, organized crime will develop a way of doing anonymous transactions. Probably not Tide, though, that sounds like a story picked up from The Onion.
Or, in other words, not known at all. 7th season Buffy?
Nope, you give up the right to appeal on substantive grounds. You can only appeal on procedural grounds.
Because that's not actually true. Debt discharged in bankruptcy is not taxable.
Foreclosures are more complex, but if your home was your only significant asset, or you declared bankruptcy to discharge the residual debt, the cancelled debt likely isn't taxable.
No, it's just interference. "Potential for projectiles" is an example of the kinds of additional excuses that those in favor of rules for rules sake start to tack on when their original reason starts to wear thin.