That's an ECPA violation there, Google. And it's a felony.
Not if it occurred in Europe, since the ECPA is US law. Doesn't apply in the US, either; by the terms of the ECPA a unencrypted wifi signal is "readily accessible to the general public", and thus not covered. (See 18 USC 2510(16), and 2511(2)(g)(i))
If my front door is shut, but not locked, does that entitle anyone to come in and rip off my stuff or go through my desk and copy down my banking details?
No, but if you wrote your banking details on a sign in your front yard, don't be surprised if someone takes a picture.
Oh, and please notice that only males do that, I've never seen a Jane Junior Doe
Of course not, in the US the number goes last -- it's "Jane Doe Junior". It's pretty unusual (but not unheard of) for daughters to be named after mothers, but often they're named after grandmothers, so you can get Dorothy/Jane/Dorothy/Jane/Dorothy/Jane alternating through the generations.
The idea that if even someone's name doesn't fit "your" database, then you can just brush them off and have a beer.
We can. Fact is, trying to write a system which can deal with all those 40 assumptions and still do anything useful with names is impossible. Even covering most of them is impractical, if you want programmers to do anything else. It has nothing to do with OCD. The programmers aren't making the rules because of some inner desire for order, but because the requirements of the system require they be made.
Suppose your system is some sort of order-taking system. And one of the things it must do is print your name on a mailing label. How do you handle that if the name doesn't _fit_ on the mailing label? Or if there is no name at all? Or if the mailing label printer doesn't handle the name's character set? Or if the postal service for the countries in question have standards for names which are not met?
Which is exactly what they want you to think. The reality is that you can make a difference.
Right. This from the EFF, turning back the tide since 1990. Since then we've gotten the No Electronic Theft Act, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a new "inducement" infringement tort, losses in the 2600 case and Blizzard v. bnetd, etc.
The reality is that the EFF can't make a difference _either_.
Perhaps an electrical or mechanical engineer out there could explain for me why they can't or don't put windmills on top of high voltage power line towers?
Mechanical is right. Those towers are strong enough to support themselves and the power lines. They probably couldn't support the static weight of a windmill, and they certainly couldn't support the forces an operating windmill would put on them.
So the Government (or the egacorporation acting on the govt's behalf) can turn off your appliance, and only let you use it during certain predetermined times. i.e. Rationing of electricity usage.
Yeah I know..... you think I'm a nutter for saying that, but then again I've studied government history. If they CAN do a thing, they will do that thing. Maybe not now, maybe not tomorrow, but eventually.
True, but in the US we'll at least have warning... the UK will do it first.
The dryer drum turns. The back and front of the dryer do not. To keep heat and clothing inside the drum while allowing the drum to turn, there are two felt seals between the drum and the case. These wear down and that can result in clothing being pushed through the seals.
I've never seen the $ breakdown of "let it get hot and cool" vs "keep it sort of cool".
There's no general case. It depends on the size of your system, the efficiency of your insulation, the thermal mass of your house and contents, outside temperature and humidity, and probably other factors as well.
If your system lacks the capacity to cool the house down to reasonable levels while you are home if you turn it off while your away, the answer is pretty simple though.
mandate that all appliances (DVD players, TV's, etc) had an actual, PHYSICAL POWER SWITCH rather than being electrical vampires.
15%? Bullshit. Your cited article claims 5% of residential use.
just to wait for a power-on signal from some lazy fatass who can't stand up and walk 8 feet from the couch to turn it on.
Eh, fuck you. I like the trappings of modern technology, even if it costs a few kWh/yr. You want to deal with easily-fixed inconvenience to save a trivial amount of power, you go right ahead.
"You know, if you waited 4 hours and ran this load of laundy at midnight, you'd save 30% because of the lower power rates"
That would be pretty cool and useful! We can save a lot of money, not by buying a bunch of new electronic goods but, by simply modifying our habits with our current electric drawing devices.
Except for any number of issues.
1) Power rates aren't lower at midnight for most residential customers 1a)... nor is there any particular reason for them to be lower at midnight than at 8pm. 2) Wet clothes sitting in the dryer for hours? Not a good idea. 3) Hot and noisy dryer running when I'm trying to sleep 4) Don't want to be hanging/folding clothes at 1am, and don't want my clothes to be excessively wrinkled. etc.
Calling Iridium a "commercial launch" is a bit of a stretch. Iridium failed as a commercial venture and the company that runs it now appears to be a transparent pawn of the DoD.
As part of our computer usage policy, anyone getting internet access must agree to express conditions of using it, for example no file downloads, no porn, no webmail etc. We monitor usage in co-ordination with blocking software to ensure compliance with this policy to ensure the safety of not just the IT infrastructure but also the companies regulatory, compliance and law requirements
My company has a very strict policy as well. You're expected as a condition of employment to acknowledge that you may end up seeing stuff that will burn your eyeballs out and that you're OK with that. Then you can access the whole Internet.
In modern American businesses, everything's a "cost center" except sales and top management itself. This specifically includes not only IT but product development. Thus, sales is the darling of the execs and everyone else gets the shaft.
In that case, you and your car probably shouldn't hoon around on the street either.
Eh, whatever. When fuckhead killjoys point to an unattainable ideal ("take it to the track") as the alternative to whatever activity they are objecting to, and feel satisfied in the fact that they haven't actually gone so far as to provide Hobson's choice ("the horse nearest the door, or no horse at all" -- or in modern terms, "My way or the highway"), you shouldn't be too surprised when those they wish to control reject their ideal and continue with their original activity.
I thought there was something in federal law which either seriously limited or prohibited the creation of single-person companies for the sole purpose of software development. Maybe I'm mistaken...
Basically it's difficult to arrange it so that you are considered unambiguously a contractor, so a lot of large companies refuse to deal with such single-person companies fearing they'll later sue claiming they were employees and didn't get employee benefits. But it's not actually illegal to be a freelance contractor.
The problem that got us into trouble with the Clinton tax cuts was that there was a corresponding incompetence of the Federal reserve. As in even as the tax rates were going down, the interest rates were also going down because quite frankly supply side economics only works in the specific case where there's insufficient liquidity in the markets. Which most certainly wasn't the case during most of the 90s.
Eh? Under Clinton, the current account deficit disappeared (at least according to official accounting methods). So I don't see the problem at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Not if it occurred in Europe, since the ECPA is US law. Doesn't apply in the US, either; by the terms of the ECPA a unencrypted wifi signal is "readily accessible to the general public", and thus not covered. (See 18 USC 2510(16), and 2511(2)(g)(i))
No, but if you wrote your banking details on a sign in your front yard, don't be surprised if someone takes a picture.
Err, no. MADD used to be for sober driving. Now they're for Prohibition.
That's J. Danforth Quayle, so even his name doesn't fit the mold. First initial and full middle name? The horrors!
Of course not, in the US the number goes last -- it's "Jane Doe Junior". It's pretty unusual (but not unheard of) for daughters to be named after mothers, but often they're named after grandmothers, so you can get Dorothy/Jane/Dorothy/Jane/Dorothy/Jane alternating through the generations.
Would have been funnier if he'd had a bombe in his bag.
We can. Fact is, trying to write a system which can deal with all those 40 assumptions and still do anything useful with names is impossible. Even covering most of them is impractical, if you want programmers to do anything else. It has nothing to do with OCD. The programmers aren't making the rules because of some inner desire for order, but because the requirements of the system require they be made.
Suppose your system is some sort of order-taking system. And one of the things it must do is print your name on a mailing label. How do you handle that if the name doesn't _fit_ on the mailing label? Or if there is no name at all? Or if the mailing label printer doesn't handle the name's character set? Or if the postal service for the countries in question have standards for names which are not met?
Right. This from the EFF, turning back the tide since 1990. Since then we've gotten the No Electronic Theft Act, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a new "inducement" infringement tort, losses in the 2600 case and Blizzard v. bnetd, etc. The reality is that the EFF can't make a difference _either_.
...or is it, in fact, The Schizoid Man?
Mechanical is right. Those towers are strong enough to support themselves and the power lines. They probably couldn't support the static weight of a windmill, and they certainly couldn't support the forces an operating windmill would put on them.
You can read that as "They wouldn't pay nearly the bribes the oil companies would pay".
If every time one human was born, an identical human died, it would be like that.
If a new pattern is created while an old one is destroyed, it's not self-replicating; it's just moving.
No, it's primarily comfort. Particularly air conditioning.
True, but in the US we'll at least have warning... the UK will do it first.
The dryer drum turns. The back and front of the dryer do not. To keep heat and clothing inside the drum while allowing the drum to turn, there are two felt seals between the drum and the case. These wear down and that can result in clothing being pushed through the seals.
There's no general case. It depends on the size of your system, the efficiency of your insulation, the thermal mass of your house and contents, outside temperature and humidity, and probably other factors as well.
If your system lacks the capacity to cool the house down to reasonable levels while you are home if you turn it off while your away, the answer is pretty simple though.
15%? Bullshit. Your cited article claims 5% of residential use.
Eh, fuck you. I like the trappings of modern technology, even if it costs a few kWh/yr. You want to deal with easily-fixed inconvenience to save a trivial amount of power, you go right ahead.
Except for any number of issues.
1) Power rates aren't lower at midnight for most residential customers ... nor is there any particular reason for them to be lower at midnight than at 8pm.
1a)
2) Wet clothes sitting in the dryer for hours? Not a good idea.
3) Hot and noisy dryer running when I'm trying to sleep
4) Don't want to be hanging/folding clothes at 1am, and don't want my clothes to be excessively wrinkled.
etc.
Calling Iridium a "commercial launch" is a bit of a stretch. Iridium failed as a commercial venture and the company that runs it now appears to be a transparent pawn of the DoD.
My company has a very strict policy as well. You're expected as a condition of employment to acknowledge that you may end up seeing stuff that will burn your eyeballs out and that you're OK with that. Then you can access the whole Internet.
In modern American businesses, everything's a "cost center" except sales and top management itself. This specifically includes not only IT but product development. Thus, sales is the darling of the execs and everyone else gets the shaft.
Eh, whatever. When fuckhead killjoys point to an unattainable ideal ("take it to the track") as the alternative to whatever activity they are objecting to, and feel satisfied in the fact that they haven't actually gone so far as to provide Hobson's choice ("the horse nearest the door, or no horse at all" -- or in modern terms, "My way or the highway"), you shouldn't be too surprised when those they wish to control reject their ideal and continue with their original activity.
Basically it's difficult to arrange it so that you are considered unambiguously a contractor, so a lot of large companies refuse to deal with such single-person companies fearing they'll later sue claiming they were employees and didn't get employee benefits. But it's not actually illegal to be a freelance contractor.
Eh? Under Clinton, the current account deficit disappeared (at least according to official accounting methods). So I don't see the problem at all.